Sand v. Steele
This text of Sand v. Steele (Sand v. Steele) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7336
EARL SAND,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
S. STEELE, Corrections Officer; L. RICKS, Corrections Officer, 6-2 Shift; DARLING, Corrections Officer; B. MOHEAD, Inmate Hearings Officer A,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-11-2)
Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: August 8, 2003
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Earl Sand, Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Earl Sand appeals the district court’s order denying relief on
his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. See Sand v. Steele, No. CA-
01-11-2 (E.D. Va. Aug. 15, 2002). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Sand v. Steele, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sand-v-steele-ca4-2003.