Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Felix v. Angelone, 97-6020 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6020 Visitors: 11
Filed: Jun. 17, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6020 DANIEL E. FELIX, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RON ANGELONE, Director, Department of Correc- tions, Virginia; D. LAWSON, Warden, Greens- ville Correctional Center; D. WILLIAMS, Corrections Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-94-1638-AM) Submitted: June 12, 1997 Decided: June 17, 1997 Bef
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6020 DANIEL E. FELIX, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RON ANGELONE, Director, Department of Correc- tions, Virginia; D. LAWSON, Warden, Greens- ville Correctional Center; D. WILLIAMS, Corrections Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-94-1638-AM) Submitted: June 12, 1997 Decided: June 17, 1997 Before WIDENER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daniel E. Felix, Appellant Pro Se. Jill Theresa Bowers, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Ac- cordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Felix v. Angelone, No. CA-94-1638-AM (E.D. Va. Nov. 15, 1996). We deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly 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