Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Earl Morgan, III v. R. Lewis, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views3 pages
    This document is a summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Earl J. Morgan filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several correctional officers and administrators which was denied by the district court. Morgan appealed this decision. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Court also denied Morgan's motion to appoint counsel, determining that oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2013-03-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-6023

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Earl J. Morgan filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several correctional officers and administrators which was denied by the district court. Morgan appealed this decision. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Court also denied Morgan's motion to appoint counsel, determining that oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views3 pages

    Earl Morgan, III v. R. Lewis, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Earl J. Morgan filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several correctional officers and administrators which was denied by the district court. Morgan appealed this decision. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The Court also denied Morgan's motion to appoint counsel, determining that oral arguments were not necessary as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 13-6023

    EARL J. MORGAN, III,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    R. K. LEWIS, HCC Captain; J. W. KING, HCC Sergeant; DOBYNS,
    Sergeant; TUPPONS, HCC Corr. Officer; BRYANT, HCC Corr.
    Officer; S. W. ALLEN, HCC Hearing Officer; D. R. DUGGER,
    GRCC Hearing Officer; JOYCETINE BOONE, GRCC Assist. Warden;
    A. DAVID ROBINSON, Regional Director; ELLIOT, Corr. Officer,
    Defendants Appellees,
    and
    PATRICK J. GURNEY, HCC Assist. Warden; DANIEL T. MAHON, HCC
    Warden,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
    District Judge. (1:11-cv-01150-JCC-TCB)

    Submitted:

    February 26, 2013

    Decided: March 1, 2013

    Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Earl J. Morgan, III, Appellant Pro Se.


    Richard Carson Vorhis,
    Senior Assistant Attorney General, Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, OFFICE
    OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Earl J. Morgan, III appeals the district courts order
    denying relief on Morgans 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint.
    We

    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    See Morgan v. R. Lewis, No. 1:11-cv-01150-JCC-TCB (E.D.

    court.

    Va. Dec. 19, 2012).


    counsel.
    legal
    before

    We also deny Morgans motion to appoint

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

    contentions
    this

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like