Azaniah Blankumsee v. Maryland Dept of Public Safety, No. 17-7329 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7329 AZANIAH BLANKUMSEE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, DPSCS; DAYENA M. CORCORAN, Commissioner of Corrections; WARDEN RICHARD J. GRAHAM, JR.; ASSISTANT WARDEN DENISE A. GELSINGER; CO II CHRISTOPHER A. LOIBEL; WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC.; JANICE GILMORE, Medical Regional Administrator at W.C.I.; ROBUSTIANO BERRERA, Medical Administrator at W.C.I.; CO II ALICIA A. CARTWRIGHT; JANE DOE, Nurse at W.C.I.; RYAN BROWNING, Registered Nurse at W.C.I., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paul W. Grimm, District Judge. (8:16-cv-02801-PWG) Submitted: June 21, 2018 Decided: June 25, 2018 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Azaniah Blankumsee, Appellant Pro Se. Gina Marie Smith, MEYERS, RODBELL & ROSENBAUM, PA, Riverdale Park, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Azaniah Blankumsee appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Blankumsee v. Md. Dep’t of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs., DPSCS, No. 8:16-cv-02801-PWG (D. Md. Sept. 8, 2017). We dismiss Janice Gilmore as a party, in light of her recent death and the fact that we are affirming the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART * Although Blankumsee lists the district court’s court May 2, 2017, order in his notice of appeal, he does not raise any issues related to this order in his informal briefs. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (recognizing that we limit our review to issues raised in informal brief); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014). 3

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.