Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    1) Charles Thomas Locklear filed a Section 1983 lawsuit against prison officials which was denied by the district court. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling without oral argument, finding the appeal lacked merit based on the record and reasoning in the lower court's opinion. 3) The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1988-11-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 862 F.2d 870 Docket: 88-6792

    Original Title

    Charles Thomas Locklear v. Ceasar Manrique Mary Woodson John Holman Bobby W. Soles James E. Johnson Edward Murray William P. Rogers, 862 F.2d 870, 4th Cir. (1988)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Charles Thomas Locklear filed a Section 1983 lawsuit against prison officials which was denied by the district court. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling without oral argument, finding the appeal lacked merit based on the record and reasoning in the lower court's opinion. 3) The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views2 pages

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Charles Thomas Locklear filed a Section 1983 lawsuit against prison officials which was denied by the district court. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling without oral argument, finding the appeal lacked merit based on the record and reasoning in the lower court's opinion. 3) The Fourth Circuit dispensed with oral argument as the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    862 F.

    2d 870
    Unpublished Disposition

    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    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing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.
    Charles Thomas LOCKLEAR, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    Ceasar MANRIQUE; Mary Woodson; John Holman; Bobby
    W.
    Soles; James E. Johnson; Edward Murray; William
    P. Rogers, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 88-6792.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: Oct. 25, 1988.
    Decided: Nov. 22, 1988.

    Charles Thomas Locklear, appellant pro se.


    Mark Ralph Davis (Office of the Attorney General of Virginia), for
    appellees.
    Before DONALD RUSSELL, WIDENER and CHAPMAN, Circuit
    Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Charles Thomas Locklear appeals from the district court's order denying relief
    under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. 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. Locklear v. Manrique, C/A No. 87-120-L
    (W.D.Va. Aug. 18, 1988). 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.


    2

    AFFIRMED.

    You might also like