Filed: May 29, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6488 DEMARCUS M. BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BRETT EDMONDS; N. COMER; DANIEL BRAXTON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-132-7) Submitted: May 15, 2003 Decided: May 29, 2003 Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6488 DEMARCUS M. BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BRETT EDMONDS; N. COMER; DANIEL BRAXTON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-132-7) Submitted: May 15, 2003 Decided: May 29, 2003 Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6488 DEMARCUS M. BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BRETT EDMONDS; N. COMER; DANIEL BRAXTON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-132-7) Submitted: May 15, 2003 Decided: May 29, 2003 Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Demarcus M. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Demarcus M. Brown appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Brown v. Edmonds, No. CA- 03-132-7 (W.D. Va. filed Feb. 25, 2003 & entered Feb. 26, 2003). 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 2
