Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Fuller v. Commonwealth, 96-1649 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-1649 Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 03, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1649 MICHAEL R. FULLER; NANCY J. HALSTEAD, Plaintiffs - Appellants, versus COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief Dis- trict Judge. (CA-96-611-A) Submitted: September 20, 1996 Decided: October 3, 1996 Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
More
                            UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



                            No. 96-1649



MICHAEL R. FULLER; NANCY J. HALSTEAD,

                                           Plaintiffs - Appellants,

          versus

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,

                                              Defendant - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Chief Dis-
trict Judge. (CA-96-611-A)


Submitted:   September 20, 1996           Decided:   October 3, 1996


Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Michael R. Fuller, Nancy J. Halstead, Appellants Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Appellants appeal from the district court's order denying

their request for an emergency restraining order and for records.

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and

find no reversible error. See Younger v. Harris, 
401 U.S. 37
(1971). Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Fuller v. Virginia, No. CA-96-611-A (E.D. Va. May 9, 1996).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-

tions 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