Filed: Dec. 10, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7431 TIMOTHY GRIMES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RON ANGELONE, Director of Virginia Correc- tions; MARK L. EARLEY, Attorney General of Virginia, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-01-939-AM) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 10, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judg
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7431 TIMOTHY GRIMES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RON ANGELONE, Director of Virginia Correc- tions; MARK L. EARLEY, Attorney General of Virginia, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-01-939-AM) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 10, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7431 TIMOTHY GRIMES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RON ANGELONE, Director of Virginia Correc- tions; MARK L. EARLEY, Attorney General of Virginia, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-01-939-AM) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 10, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Timothy Grimes, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Timothy Grimes appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Grimes v. Angelone, No. CA-01-939-AM (E.D. Va. Aug. 14, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
