Crawley v. Braxton
This text of Crawley v. Braxton (Crawley v. Braxton) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6150
DAVID EDWARD CRAWLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
DAN A. BRAXTON; ASSISTANT WARDEN ARMENTROUT; LIEUTENANT HONAKER; B. EDMOND, Hearing Officer; G. BAYES, QMHP; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER HAMPTON; W. WOODS, Correctional Officer; W. SYKES, Correctional Officer; S. DEEL, Correctional Officer,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-02-1057-7)
Submitted: May 15, 2003 Decided: May 22, 2003
Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Edward Crawley, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
David Edward Crawley appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Crawley
v. Braxton, No. CA-02-1057-7 (W.D. Va. Jan. 8, 2003). 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Crawley v. Braxton, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crawley-v-braxton-ca4-2003.