George Adinnu v. Investigator Killmon Benny Powers, City of Norfolk Norfolk City Jail

900 F.2d 249, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 4303, 1990 WL 41107
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 23, 1990
Docket90-6765
StatusUnpublished

This text of 900 F.2d 249 (George Adinnu v. Investigator Killmon Benny Powers, City of Norfolk Norfolk City Jail) 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
George Adinnu v. Investigator Killmon Benny Powers, City of Norfolk Norfolk City Jail, 900 F.2d 249, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 4303, 1990 WL 41107 (4th Cir. 1990).

Opinion

900 F.2d 249
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
George ADINNU, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Investigator KILLMON; Benny Powers, City of Norfolk;
Norfolk City Jail, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 90-6765.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 5, 1990.
Decided: March 23, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., District Judge. (C/A No. 89-48-N)

George Adinnu, appellant pro se.

Michael Anson Rhine, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, Va.; Guy Winston Horsley, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Stephen Royce Jackson, Willcox & Savage, PC, Norfolk, Va., for appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and PHILLIPS and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

George Adinnu appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Adinnu v. Killmon, C/A No. 89-48-N (E.D.Va. Jan. 16, 1990). 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

Barmer v. Schaefer
900 F.2d 249 (Fourth Circuit, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
900 F.2d 249, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 4303, 1990 WL 41107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-adinnu-v-investigator-killmon-benny-powers-city-of-norfolk-norfolk-ca4-1990.