Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 12 views

    Brooks v. Mitchell, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from Fernanza L. Brooks, a Virginia inmate, of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found Brooks' appeal to be frivolous. The Court therefore dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its earlier denial of Brooks' complaint.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Brooks v. Mitchell, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    12 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from Fernanza L. Brooks, a Virginia inmate, of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found Brooks' appeal to be frivolous. The Court therefore dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its earlier denial of Brooks' complaint.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2001-05-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-6379

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from Fernanza L. Brooks, a Virginia inmate, of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found Brooks' appeal to be frivolous. The Court therefore dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its earlier denial of Brooks' complaint.

    Copyright:

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

    Brooks v. Mitchell, 4th Cir. (2001)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed an appeal from Fernanza L. Brooks, a Virginia inmate, of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and district court opinion and found Brooks' appeal to be frivolous. The Court therefore dismissed the appeal based on the reasoning provided by the district court in its earlier denial of Brooks' complaint.

    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. 01-6379

    FERNANZA L. BROOKS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    MICHELLE B. MITCHELL; JAMES WOMACK; CHARLES
    WILKINS; DIANNE MINNETI; K. S. JOHNSON,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis III, District Judge.
    (CA-00-1959-AM)

    Submitted:

    May 17, 2001

    Decided:

    May 29, 2001

    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Fernanza L. Brooks, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Fernanza L. Brooks, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district
    courts order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp.
    2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. 1915A (West Supp. 2000).

    We

    have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion and find
    that this appeal is frivolous.

    Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal

    on the reasoning of the district court.

    Brooks v. Mitchell, No.

    CA-00-1959-AM (E.D. Va. Feb. 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.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like