Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Raymond Brown v. United States of America, J.T. Hadden, Warden, James Hind, 91-6556 (1991)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 91-6556 Visitors: 18
Filed: Jun. 20, 1991
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 935 F.2d 1285 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Raymond BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, J.T. Hadden, Warden, James Hind, Defendants-Appellees. No. 91-6556. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted June 3, 1991.
More

935 F.2d 1285
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Raymond BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, J.T. Hadden, Warden, James Hind,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 91-6556.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 3, 1991.
Decided June 20, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CA-91-452-A)

Raymond Brown, appellant pro se.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Raymond Brown appeals from the district court's order dismissing his "Law Suit" which--seeking damages--alleges ineffective assistance of counsel or that he is being forced to take anti-psychotic drugs or both. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Brown v. United States, CA-91-452-A (E.D.Va. Mar. 26, 1991). 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

AFFIRMED.

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