Filed: Jul. 01, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6119 CEDRIC DEMON STEWART, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. M. BLAND, Job Coordinator; P. SMITH, Ed Director; MAJOR WALKER, Chief of Security, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cv-00512-RAJ-JEB) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 1, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6119 CEDRIC DEMON STEWART, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. M. BLAND, Job Coordinator; P. SMITH, Ed Director; MAJOR WALKER, Chief of Security, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cv-00512-RAJ-JEB) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 1, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circui..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6119 CEDRIC DEMON STEWART, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. M. BLAND, Job Coordinator; P. SMITH, Ed Director; MAJOR WALKER, Chief of Security, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cv-00512-RAJ-JEB) Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 1, 2008 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cedric Demon Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Cedric Demon Stewart appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Stewart v. Bland, No. 2:07-cv-00512-RAJ-JEB (E.D. Va. Dec. 7, 2007). 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 -
