Roger Gomez Alston v. W.R. Brackman Ted Parks W.P. Rogers Delores Puckett Larry D. Huffman Deborah Swisher Lonnie Saunders L.R. Day

Fourth Circuit

Roger Gomez Alston v. W.R. Brackman Ted Parks W.P. Rogers Delores Puckett Larry D. Huffman Deborah Swisher Lonnie Saunders L.R. Day

23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18434, 1994 WL 168345

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 5, 1994

Docket92-6855

StatusPublished

This text of 23 F.3d 399 (Roger Gomez Alston v. W.R. Brackman Ted Parks W.P. Rogers Delores Puckett Larry D. Huffman Deborah Swisher Lonnie Saunders L.R. Day) 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

Roger Gomez Alston v. W.R. Brackman Ted Parks W.P. Rogers Delores Puckett Larry D. Huffman Deborah Swisher Lonnie Saunders L.R. Day, 23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18434, 1994 WL 168345 (4th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

23 F.3d 399
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Roger Gomez ALSTON, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
W.R. BRACKMAN; Ted Parks; W.P. Rogers; Delores Puckett;
larry D. Huffman; Deborah Swisher; Lonnie
Saunders; L.R. Day, Defendants Appellees.

No. 92-6855.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 3, 1993.
Decided May 5, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-92-174-R)

Roger Gomez Alston, appellant pro se.

William Rundahl Coleman, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for appellees.

W.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, PHILLIPS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Roger Gomez Alston appeals from the district court's orders denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) and denying his motion for reconsideration. Our review of the record and the district court's opinions discloses no abuse of discretion and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* Alston v. Brackman, No. CA-92-174-R (W.D.Va. July 20 and Sept. 2, 1992). 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

*

We grant Alston's "Motion to Cure Premature Appeal."

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

23 F.3d 399
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.

Roger Gomez ALSTON, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
W.R. BRACKMAN; Ted Parks; W.P. Rogers; Delores Puckett;
larry D. Huffman; Deborah Swisher; Lonnie
Saunders; L.R. Day, Defendants Appellees.

No. 92-6855.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 3, 1993.
Decided May 5, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-92-174-R)

Roger Gomez Alston, appellant pro se.

William Rundahl Coleman, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for appellees.

W.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, PHILLIPS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Roger Gomez Alston appeals from the district court's orders denying relief under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) and denying his motion for reconsideration. Our review of the record and the district court's opinions discloses no abuse of discretion and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* Alston v. Brackman, No. CA-92-174-R (W.D.Va. July 20 and Sept. 2, 1992). 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

*

We grant Alston's "Motion to Cure Premature Appeal."

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18434, 1994 WL 168345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roger-gomez-alston-v-wr-brackman-ted-parks-wp-roge-ca4-1994.