Filed: Mar. 31, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6119 ROBERT LEONARD HUFFMAN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HOUSTON NORRIS, Lt. Watch Commander; ALLEN SELLERS, Correction Officer; ROBBIE HUGHES, Correction Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-04-316-3) Submitted: March 24, 2005 Decided: March 31, 2005 Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Jud
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6119 ROBERT LEONARD HUFFMAN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HOUSTON NORRIS, Lt. Watch Commander; ALLEN SELLERS, Correction Officer; ROBBIE HUGHES, Correction Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-04-316-3) Submitted: March 24, 2005 Decided: March 31, 2005 Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judg..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6119 ROBERT LEONARD HUFFMAN, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HOUSTON NORRIS, Lt. Watch Commander; ALLEN SELLERS, Correction Officer; ROBBIE HUGHES, Correction Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-04-316-3) Submitted: March 24, 2005 Decided: March 31, 2005 Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Leonard Huffman, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Adrian Gibney, Jr., THOMPSON & MCMULLAN, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert Leonard Huffman, Jr., 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 for the reasons stated by the district court. See Huffman v. Norris, No. CA-04-316-3 (E.D. Va. Jan. 20, 2005). 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 -
