Filed: Jun. 03, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6327 RUFUS W. GOODMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus A. D. MATHEWS, SR., Sheriff; COUNTY OF HENRICO, VIRGINIA; MICHEL MARQUEZ, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-97-296-2) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: June 3, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6327 RUFUS W. GOODMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus A. D. MATHEWS, SR., Sheriff; COUNTY OF HENRICO, VIRGINIA; MICHEL MARQUEZ, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-97-296-2) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: June 3, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affir..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6327 RUFUS W. GOODMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus A. D. MATHEWS, SR., Sheriff; COUNTY OF HENRICO, VIRGINIA; MICHEL MARQUEZ, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-97-296-2) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: June 3, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rufus W. Goodman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1994) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Goodman v. Mathews, No. CA-97-296-2 (E.D. Va. Jan. 26, 1998). We deny Appel- lant's motion for the appointment of counsel. 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 2
