Case Name: Dewight BYRD, a/k/a Charles W. Reed, III, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael STOUFFER, Commissioner of Correction; Gary Maynard, Secretary of DPSCS; John Rowley, Warden; D. Northcraft, Chief of Security; Werner, Lieutenant, In their Individual and Official Capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-04-29
Citations: 431 F. App'x 235
Docket Number: No. 10-7451
Parties: Dewight BYRD, a/k/a Charles W. Reed, III, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael STOUFFER, Commissioner of Correction; Gary Maynard, Secretary of DPSCS; John Rowley, Warden; D. Northcraft, Chief of Security; Werner, Lieutenant, In their Individual and Official Capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 431
Pages: 235–235

Head Matter:
Dewight BYRD, a/k/a Charles W. Reed, III, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael STOUFFER, Commissioner of Correction; Gary Maynard, Secretary of DPSCS; John Rowley, Warden; D. Northcraft, Chief of Security; Werner, Lieutenant, In their Individual and Official Capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-7451.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 12, 2011.
Decided: April 29, 2011.
Dewight Byrd, Appellant Pro Se. Glenn William Bell, Office of the Attorney Gener-al of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dewight Byrd appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the Appellees on Byrd's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the stated by the district court. Byrd v. Stouffer, No. 1:08-cv-02368-CCB, 2010 WL 3928557 (D.Md. Sept. 30, 2010). We also deny Byrd's motion to appoint coun-sel. We dispense with oral argument be-cause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be-fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.