Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Newell v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document is a summary of a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Larry Newell Jr. appealed the district court's denial of relief in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action pursuant to a jury verdict. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's orders denying relief. The Court reviewed the existing record without a transcript since Newell did not establish a basis for a transcript to be prepared at government expense. The Court found no basis for appellate relief and denied Newell's motion for appointment of counsel.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-09-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-6390

    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. Larry Newell Jr. appealed the district court's denial of relief in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action pursuant to a jury verdict. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's orders denying relief. The Court reviewed the existing record without a transcript since Newell did not establish a basis for a transcript to be prepared at government expense. The Court found no basis for appellate relief and denied Newell's motion for appointment of counsel.

    Copyright:

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

    Newell v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2003)

    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. Larry Newell Jr. appealed the district court's denial of relief in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action pursuant to a jury verdict. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's orders denying relief. The Court reviewed the existing record without a transcript since Newell did not establish a basis for a transcript to be prepared at government expense. The Court found no basis for appellate relief and denied Newell's motion for appointment of counsel.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-6390

    LARRY NEWELL, JR.,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    RON ANGELONE; PAGE TRUE; L. FLEMING; J. B.
    OQUINN, Sergeant; L. HALL; A. KILBOURNE; V.
    TATE; JAMES E. BRIGGS; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER
    SYKES;
    CORRECTIONAL
    OFFICER
    LAMBERT;
    CORRECTIONAL OFFICER SULLIVAN; SERGEANT ROSE,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    J. ARMENTROUT; G. HAWKS; RICHARD YOUNG; DOCTOR
    NWAUCHE; NURSE MESSER; NURSE HAYNES; NURSE
    MEAD; J. HILL, Nurse; P. ADAMS, Nurse; NURSE
    BROWNLEY; NURSE YATES; NURSE NEELEY; F.
    SCHILLING; L. MULLINS; BRETT EDMONDS; W. E.
    MARTIN; JOHN DOE,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief
    District Judge; James P. Jones, District Judge. (CA-01-70241)

    Submitted:

    July 31, 2003

    Decided:

    September 2, 2003

    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Larry Newell, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Philip Carlton Hollowell,


    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Larry Newell, Jr., appeals the district courts orders denying
    relief in his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) action, pursuant to the
    jurys verdict. Newell has not provided a transcript, and he fails
    to establish a basis to have a transcript prepared at government
    expense.

    28 U.S.C. 753(f) (2000).

    We have reviewed the existing

    record and find no basis for appellate relief.

    Accordingly, we

    affirm the district courts orders. See Newell v. Angelone, No. CA01-70241 (W.D. Va. filed Mar. 7, 2002 & entered Mar. 8, 2002; Feb.
    20, 2003).

    We deny Newells motion for appointment of counsel and

    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
    2

    You might also like