Kenneth Peebles v. Director, Department of Corrections Central Classification Board

905 F.2d 1531, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8196, 1990 WL 73482
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 21, 1990
Docket89-7237
StatusUnpublished

This text of 905 F.2d 1531 (Kenneth Peebles v. Director, Department of Corrections Central Classification Board) 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
Kenneth Peebles v. Director, Department of Corrections Central Classification Board, 905 F.2d 1531, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8196, 1990 WL 73482 (4th Cir. 1990).

Opinion

905 F.2d 1531

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Kenneth PEEBLES, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Central Classification
Board, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 89-7237.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 28, 1990.
Decided May 21, 1990.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Chief District Judge. (C/A No. 88-667-AM)

Kenneth Peebles, appellant pro se.

Richard Francis Gorman, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Va., for appellees.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Peebles 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. Peebles v. Director, Dep't. of Corrections, CA-88-667-AM (E.D.Va. Oct. 31, 1989). 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.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
905 F.2d 1531, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8196, 1990 WL 73482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kenneth-peebles-v-director-department-of-corrections-central-ca4-1990.