Louis Osei Cotton v. Michael Redmon

Tenth Circuit

Louis Osei Cotton v. Michael Redmon

951 F.2d 1258, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 32477, 1991 WL 275635

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedDecember 20, 1991

Docket91-3201

StatusPublished

This text of 951 F.2d 1258 (Louis Osei Cotton v. Michael Redmon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Louis Osei Cotton v. Michael Redmon, 951 F.2d 1258, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 32477, 1991 WL 275635 (10th Cir. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

951 F.2d 1258

NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

Louis Osei COTTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Michael REDMON, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-3201.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Dec. 20, 1991.

Before McKAY, Chief Judge, SEYMOUR and EBEL, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

McKAY, Chief Judge.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. We grant appellant's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and proceed to consider the merits of the appeal.

Plaintiff, an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Lansing, Kansas, brought suit in federal district court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claimed that the attorney appointed to defend him against a murder charge provided inadequate representation, thereby depriving him of a fundamental constitutional right. After considering plaintiff's allegations, the district court found that plaintiff's claims were insufficient to proceed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and dismissed the action. Plaintiff appeals that decision to this court.

After a thorough review of the record and the pleadings, we AFFIRM the decision of the district court for substantially the reasons set forth in the district court order dated May 16, 1991.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

*

This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir.R. 36.3

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

951 F.2d 1258

NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

Louis Osei COTTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Michael REDMON, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-3201.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Dec. 20, 1991.

Before McKAY, Chief Judge, SEYMOUR and EBEL, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

McKAY, Chief Judge.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 10th Cir.R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. We grant appellant's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and proceed to consider the merits of the appeal.

Plaintiff, an inmate at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Lansing, Kansas, brought suit in federal district court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claimed that the attorney appointed to defend him against a murder charge provided inadequate representation, thereby depriving him of a fundamental constitutional right. After considering plaintiff's allegations, the district court found that plaintiff's claims were insufficient to proceed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and dismissed the action. Plaintiff appeals that decision to this court.

After a thorough review of the record and the pleadings, we AFFIRM the decision of the district court for substantially the reasons set forth in the district court order dated May 16, 1991.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

*

This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir.R. 36.3

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

951 F.2d 1258, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 32477, 1991 WL 275635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/louis-osei-cotton-v-michael-redmon-ca10-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack