White v. Francis

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 13, 2009
Docket08-7516
StatusUnpublished

This text of White v. Francis (White v. Francis) 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
White v. Francis, (4th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7516

WALTER DUANE WHITE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JOYCE FRANCIS, Warden; VALORIE RAPPOLD, A.W. Operations; MATT ARNOLD, Captain; SLIGER, Lt. Security; DEBORAH LIVINGSTON, Disciplinary Hearing Officer (D.H.O.); WILSON, Assistant Food Service Administrator; MRS. VELTYRY, A-Unit Manager (Coordinator Job Assignments); MARK DIB, Lt., Physicians Assistant; MRS. FRYE, Food Service Correctional Officer; MRS. HILTON, Food Service Correctional Officer; ROBERT SPEARS,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, GILMER,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:07-cv-00032-IMK-JSK)

Submitted: April 22, 2009 Decided: May 13, 2009

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Walter Duane White, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Walter Duane White appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown

Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we deny White’s motion for appointment of counsel

and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

White v. Francis, No. 1:07-cv-00032-IMK-JSK, 2008 WL 2705102

(N.D. W. Va. July 9, 2008). 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

Bluebook (online)
White v. Francis, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-francis-ca4-2009.