Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

96-6387 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-6387 Visitors: 6
Filed: Aug. 05, 1996
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 92 F.3d 1181 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Bartholomew ROBINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; Executive Head; George Allen, Governor; Ronald Angelone, Director of Virginia Department of Corrections; R.A. Young, Region Administrator, Western Distri
More

92 F.3d 1181

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Bartholomew ROBINSON, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; Executive Head; George Allen,
Governor; Ronald Angelone, Director of Virginia Department
of Corrections; R.A. Young, Region Administrator, Western
District of Virginia Department of Corrections; George
Deeds, Warden of Keen Mountain Correctional Center,
Defendants--Appellees.

No. 96-6387.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 23, 1996
Decided: August 5, 1996

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (CA-96-212)

Bartholomew Robinson, Appellant Pro Se.

W.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Robinson v. Virginia, No. CA-96-212 (W.D.Va. Mar. 6, 1996). 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

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