Thomas Woodrow Rice v. R. Michael Bruse

962 F.2d 7, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 17286, 1992 WL 103665
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 18, 1992
Docket92-6311
StatusUnpublished

This text of 962 F.2d 7 (Thomas Woodrow Rice v. R. Michael Bruse) 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
Thomas Woodrow Rice v. R. Michael Bruse, 962 F.2d 7, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 17286, 1992 WL 103665 (4th Cir. 1992).

Opinion

962 F.2d 7

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Thomas Woodrow RICE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
R. Michael BRUSE, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-6311.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 4, 1992
Decided: May 18, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-92-26-H)

Thomas Woodrow Rice, Appellant Pro Se.

E.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before HALL, WILKINS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Woodrow Rice appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). 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.* Rice v. Bruse, No. CA-92-26-H (E.D.N.C. Feb. 7, 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

*

This opinion does not affect Rice's ability to file a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) motion challenging his attorney's effectiveness, provided he has exhausted his state court remedies

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
962 F.2d 7, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 17286, 1992 WL 103665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-woodrow-rice-v-r-michael-bruse-ca4-1992.