Rocky Dee Hines, Plaintiff--appellant,andleo Rites; Roosevelt Brandon; Robert White; Williamjamison; Rick Bailey; Michael Sewell, Plaintiffs, v. Richard A. Lanham, Sr.; William L. Smith, Defendants--appellees.leo Rites; Roosevelt Brandon; Robert White; Williamjamison, Plaintiffs--appellants,androcky Dee Hines; Rick Bailey; Michael Sewell, Plaintiffs, v. Richard A. Lanham, Sr.; William L. Smith, Defendants--appellees, 60 F.3d 822 (4th Cir. 1995)
Annotate this CaseRocky Dee Hines, Leo Rites, Roosevelt Brandon, Robert White, William Jamison, Appellants Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Atty. Gen., Audrey J.S. Carrion, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for appellees.
Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Appellants appeal from the district court's order denying relief on their 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaints. We have reviewed the records and the district court's opinion, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Rites v. Lanham, No. CA-94-1429-H (D. Md. Mar. 2, 1995). 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
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.
