Jackson v. Smith

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-8542 LAMONT JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SEWALL B. SMITH; JOSEPH WILSON; MAURICE MIDDLETON; THOMAS COUNCIL; ROSS HURLEY; SAMUEL LEE; WALLY BARNES; ALLEN LONG; LILLIAN WILLIAMS; SEIGFRIED PRESBURY; WESLEY CARTER; SERGEANT CUNNINGHAM; T. STEWART; SERGEANT HICKS; SERGEANT MADDOX; L. KENT; T. CARTER, Sergeant, all in their official and individual capacities, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge; Daniel E. Klein, Jr., Magistrate Judge. (CA-93-4003-JFM) Submitted: June 20, 1996 Decided: June 28, 1996 Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lamont Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attor- ney General, Glenn William Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order (1) entering judgment pursuant to a jury verdict for Defendants on (a) a claim of excessive use of force by a correctional officer and (b) a claim that conditions of confinement violated the Eighth Amendment; and (2) granting Defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law on a claim that placement in isolation violated a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade- quately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3