Basham v. Edwards

23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18441, 1994 WL 191690
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 17, 1994
Docket94-1245
StatusPublished

This text of 23 F.3d 399 (Basham v. Edwards) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Basham v. Edwards, 23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18441, 1994 WL 191690 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

23 F.3d 399
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Luther C. BASHAM, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
D. EDWARDS, Chief Hearing Officer, South Central Regional
Jail; S. L. Sneed, Correctional Officer,
Individually and in their personal
capacities, Defendants Appellees.

No. 94-1245.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Submitted: April 21, 1994.
Decided: May 17, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CA-93-849)

Luther C. Basham, Appellant Pro Se.

Donald Lynn Darling, Chad M. Cardinal, Office of the Attorney General of West Virginia, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.

S.D.W.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Basham v. Edwards, No. CA-93-849 (S.D.W. Va. Feb. 9, 1994). 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18441, 1994 WL 191690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/basham-v-edwards-ca4-1994.