Holsey v. Pereira

Related Cases

Aaron Holsey v. William D. Schaefer, Governor Pat Conroy, B.C.C.C. Unit Manager Kenneth E. Taylor, Warden, Individually and as Warden of the House of Correction Richard A. Lanham, Individually and as Commissioner of Correction Pat Conroy, Individually and as Member of Corrections Transportation Unit William Britton, Individually and as Classification Supervisor at Brockbridge H. Wayne Martin, Individually and as Commander of D.O.C. Transportation Clifford P. Kelly, Individually and as Shift Commander on 2 Pm to 10 Pm Shift at Brockbridge Lehrman Dotson, Individually and as Shift Commander of 6 Am to 2 Pm Shift at Brockbridge William D. Filbert, Jr., Individually and as Assistant Warden at Brockbridge Michael Wells, Individually and as Shift Commander on 2 Pm to 10 Pm Shift at Brockbridge Randolph Glasco, Individually and as Prison Guard at B.C.C.C. Thomas R. Corcoran, Individually and as Warden of Brockbridge Prison Jacqueline Floyd, Individually and as a Sergeant Assigned to B.C.C.C.
Aaron Holsey v. Maryland Parole Commission Paul J. Davis Michael C. Blount
Aaron Holsey, and Quentin Robinson Karl Pickett Leon Sprouse Reginald Jones v. William D. Schaefer, Individually and as Governor of the State of Maryland Bishop L. Robinson, Individually and as Secretary of Department of the Division of Corrections Richard Lanham, Individually and as Commissioner of the Division of Corrections Thomas R. Corcoran, Individually and as Warden of the Brockbridge Correctional Facility Lehman Dotson, Individually and as Supervisor of Classification at Brockbridge William Britton, Individually and as Supervisor of Classification at Brockbridge Michael Wells, Individually and as Classification Counselor at the Brockbridge Prison William D. Filbert, Jr., Individually and as Assistant Warden of the Brockbridge Prison
Aaron Holsey v. William L. Smith, Individually and as Warden Allyson Golson, Individually and as Classifi Cation Counselor
Aaron Holsey v. Richard Singleton, Warden, Maryland House of Correction

PER CURIAM.

Aaron Holsey appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Holsey v. Pereira, No. CA-01-898-JFM (D.Md. Nov. 28, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.