Filed: Jul. 25, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6771 ANDRE EDMONDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DONALD R. CUMMINGS; JAMES KEELING; PAGE TRUE; RUFUS FLEMINGS, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-630) Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 25, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per cu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6771 ANDRE EDMONDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DONALD R. CUMMINGS; JAMES KEELING; PAGE TRUE; RUFUS FLEMINGS, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-630) Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 25, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per cur..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6771 ANDRE EDMONDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DONALD R. CUMMINGS; JAMES KEELING; PAGE TRUE; RUFUS FLEMINGS, Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-630) Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 25, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andre Edmonds, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Andre Edmonds appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Edmonds v. Cummings, No. CA-01-630 (E.D. Va. Apr. 22, 2002). 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
