Crenshaw v. Virginia

Fourth Circuit

Crenshaw v. Virginia

10 F. App'x 148

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 22, 2001

DocketNo. 00-7522

StatusPublished

This text of 10 F. App'x 148 (Crenshaw v. Virginia) 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

Crenshaw v. Virginia, 10 F. App'x 148 (4th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Guy Carmichael Crenshaw appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1988 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Crenshaw v. Virginia, No. CA-00-719-7 (W.D.Va. Sept. 15, 2000). We deny Crenshaw’s motion for 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

PER CURIAM.

Guy Carmichael Crenshaw appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1988 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Crenshaw v. Virginia, No. CA-00-719-7 (W.D.Va. Sept. 15, 2000). We deny Crenshaw’s motion for 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 F. App'x 148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crenshaw-v-virginia-ca4-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack