Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Knightnor v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    Two inmates, Antoine Knightnor and Demetrice Murray, sued several prison officials challenging a prison grooming policy. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the prison officials. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit adopted the reasoning of the district court, which found the prison grooming policy to be valid.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-09-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6744

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Two inmates, Antoine Knightnor and Demetrice Murray, sued several prison officials challenging a prison grooming policy. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the prison officials. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit adopted the reasoning of the district court, which found the prison grooming policy to be valid.

    Copyright:

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

    Knightnor v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Two inmates, Antoine Knightnor and Demetrice Murray, sued several prison officials challenging a prison grooming policy. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the prison officials. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit adopted the reasoning of the district court, which found the prison grooming policy to be valid.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 01-6744

    ANTOINE KNIGHTNOR; DEMETRICE MURRAY,


    Plaintiffs - Appellants,
    versus
    RON ANGELONE; G. JOHNSON; R. A. YOUNG; PAGE
    TRUE; ELSWICK; J. ARMENTROUT; BARTON; R.
    AUSTIN; J. BENTLEY; B. EDMONDS; JOHN DOE; L.
    FLEMING; D. MILLS; R. RITER; D. ARMSTRONG; M.
    PAIR; MR. BAN,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.
    (CA-00-232-7)

    Submitted:

    August 28, 2001

    Decided:

    September 11, 2001

    Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Antoine Knightnor, Demetrice Murray, Appellants 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:
    Antoine Knightnor and Demetrice Murray appeal the district
    court order granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendants in
    this civil action challenging Division Operating Procedure 864, a
    prison grooming policy.

    We have reviewed the record and the dis-

    trict courts memorandum opinion and find no reversible error.


    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.
    Knightnor v. Angelone, CA-00-232-7 (W.D. Va. Apr. 6, 2001).

    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

    You might also like