Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Cox v. Angelone, 98-6620 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-6620 Visitors: 41
Filed: Sep. 24, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6620 ANTONIO COX, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Virginia Department of Corrections, Director; MARGRET BOWLES, TPS; SHAWN MEEKS; DAVE SMITH, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-246-R) Submitted: September 10, 1998 Decided: September 24, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6620 ANTONIO COX, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Virginia Department of Corrections, Director; MARGRET BOWLES, TPS; SHAWN MEEKS; DAVE SMITH, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-246-R) Submitted: September 10, 1998 Decided: September 24, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Antonio Cox, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 1997). We have re- viewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Cox v. Angelone, No. CA-98-246-R (W.D. Va. April 22, 1998). Appellant’s motions for appointment of counsel, production of documents, and to file an amended complaint, are denied. 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. DISMISSED 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