Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-08-06839/USCOURTS-ca4-08-06839-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6839

MARC S. CASON, SR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

RICHARD WEEKS; ROBERT THOMAS; MARYLAND DIVISION OF

CORRECTIONS; E.M.S.A.,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge.

(1:08-cv-00946-CCB)

Submitted: July 22, 2008 Decided: July 28, 2008

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marc S. Cason, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 08-6839 Doc: 10 Filed: 07/28/2008 Pg: 1 of 2
*Although the district court’s order indicates that its

dismissal constituted Cason’s second PLRA strike, a review of

Cason’s numerous lawsuits reveals that Cason was previously issued

two strikes. See Cason v. Maryland Div. of Corr., No. 06-cv-2032

(D. Md. filed Aug. 21, 2006; entered Aug. 22, 2006) (second

strike); Cason v. Maryland Div. of Parole and Probation, No. 06-cv1186 (D. Md. May 17, 2006) (first strike).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Marc S. Cason, Sr., appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm

for the reasons stated by the district court. See Cason v. Weeks,

No. 1:08-cv-00946-CCB (D. Md. May 7, 2008). Because the district

court’s dismissal was Cason’s third strike under the Prison

Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2000) (“PLRA”),* Cason may

not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed

while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is

under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g) (2000). 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

Appeal: 08-6839 Doc: 10 Filed: 07/28/2008 Pg: 2 of 2