Steven Tarpley v. Stephen Moyer
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-01132-GLR. Copies to all parties and the district court. . Mailed to: Steven Tarpley. [16-7363]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
STEVEN E. TARPLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
STEPHEN T. MOYER, Interm Secretary, Department of Public Safety &
Correctional Services; WARDEN BOBBY P. SHEARIN; FRANK B. BISHOP,
JR.; RICHARD S. MILLER, Acting Warden of North Branch Correctional
Facility; CARROLL A. PARRISH; J. MICHAEL STOUFFER; WENDELL M.
FRANCE, Acting Deputy Secretary of Operations; SGT. BRIAN W. CUSTER;
SGT. LEAH A. YOUNGBLOOD; C.O. II ZACHERY D. GENTZLER; C.O. II
CORY A. DOLLEY; LT. BRADLEY A. WILT; C.O. II NICHOLAS J. SOLTAS;
C.O. MAJOR RONALD R. STOTTLER; C.O. MAJOR ROBERT M. FRIEND;
RICHARD S. RODERICK, Correctional Case Managment Manager; C.O. II
STEVEN J. MILLER, JR.; SGT. WALTER E. ISER, JR.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
George L. Russell, III, District Judge. (1:15-cv-01132-GLR)
Submitted: May 23, 2017
Before KING, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Decided: May 25, 2017
Pg: 2 of 3
Steven E. Tarpley, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, Assistant Attorney
General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 3 of 3
Steven E. Tarpley 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. Tarpley v. Moyer, No.
1:15-cv-01132-GLR (D. Md. Sept. 21, 2016). 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.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?