Rexford Garland Cassidy, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Warden Samberg; D.t. Mahon; Lieutenant Healey; Lieutenantparker; Sergeant Monett, O.i.c.; Major Lawson;correctional Officer Hill, Defendants-appellees, 900 F.2d 250 (4th Cir. 1990)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, United States Magistrate. (C/A No. 87-605-A-R).
Rexford Garland Cassidy, appellant pro se.
William W. Muse, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.
E.D. Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before DONALD RUSSELL, K.K. HALL, and SPROUSE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Rexford Garland Cassidy appeals from the magistrate's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Our review of the record and the magistrate's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate.* Cassidy v. Samberg, C/A No. 87-605-A-R (E.D. Va. Sept. 25, 1989). 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
Although the magistrate failed to discuss Cassidy's claims that he was punished for other inmates' wrongdoing when he was housed in protective custody segregation and that his confinement in protective custody segregation constituted unreasonable punishment, his claims are without merit. Cf. Breedon v. Jackson, 457 F.2d 578 (4th Cir. 1972) (amount of protection an inmate need be accorded is largely discretionary)
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
