Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Frizell Stephens v. R.M. Muncy, Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 90-6163 (1990)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 90-6163 Visitors: 17
Filed: Dec. 18, 1990
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 920 F.2d 927 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Frizell STEPHENS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. R.M. MUNCY, Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Respondents-Appellees. No. 90-6163. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. S
More

920 F.2d 927
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Frizell STEPHENS, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
R.M. MUNCY, Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 90-6163.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 3, 1990.
Decided Dec. 18, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Jackson L. Kiser, District Judge. (CA-88-199-L)

Frizell Stephens, appellant pro se.

Frank Snead Ferguson, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Va., for appellees.

W.D.Va.

DISMISSED.

Before K.K. HALL, MURNAGHAN and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Frizell Stephens appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for relief from judgment made under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Stephens v. Muncy, CA-88-199-L (W.D.Va. Oct. 10, 1990). 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.

2

DISMISSED.

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