Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Washington v. Proffitts, 06-6170 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 06-6170 Visitors: 16
Filed: May 08, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6170 ALVIN O. WASHINGTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STERLING PROFFITTS; STACY GRAHAM, Captain; DONALD E. WRIGHT, Sgt.; TONY GRYMES, Officer; VAUGHN SHULER, Lt.; MARY GRAVES, Grievance Coordinator; APRIL RYDOR, Nurse; OFFICER ROCHEFORT; LT. DYER; OFFICER HALL, Sgt.; OFFICER GRAY, Sgt.; OFFICER BRYANT; BOBBY HARDISON, C.O.; JEFF LLOYD, Officer; BRAD DARNELL, Hearing Officer; OFFICER GOOCHSGN; OFFICER DINGUS; K. JONES, Nur
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6170 ALVIN O. WASHINGTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STERLING PROFFITTS; STACY GRAHAM, Captain; DONALD E. WRIGHT, Sgt.; TONY GRYMES, Officer; VAUGHN SHULER, Lt.; MARY GRAVES, Grievance Coordinator; APRIL RYDOR, Nurse; OFFICER ROCHEFORT; LT. DYER; OFFICER HALL, Sgt.; OFFICER GRAY, Sgt.; OFFICER BRYANT; BOBBY HARDISON, C.O.; JEFF LLOYD, Officer; BRAD DARNELL, Hearing Officer; OFFICER GOOCHSGN; OFFICER DINGUS; K. JONES, Nurse, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:04-cv-00671-sgw) Submitted: April 27, 2006 Decided: May 8, 2006 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alvin O. Washington, Appellant Pro Se. Helen Eckert Phillips, Standardsville, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Alvin O. Washington appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 Washington v. Proffitts, No. 7:04-cv-00671-sgw (W.D. Va. Jan. 10, 2006). 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 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer