Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Parks v. Miller, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Milton Parks appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several prison officials. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The unpublished opinion indicates that Parks alleged civil rights violations related to his imprisonment but both the district court and appellate court ruled in favor of the defendant prison officials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Parks v. Miller, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    Milton Parks appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several prison officials. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The unpublished opinion indicates that Parks alleged civil rights violations related to his imprisonment but both the district court and appellate court ruled in favor of the defendant prison officials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-06-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-6443

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Milton Parks appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several prison officials. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The unpublished opinion indicates that Parks alleged civil rights violations related to his imprisonment but both the district court and appellate court ruled in favor of the defendant prison officials.

    Copyright:

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

    Parks v. Miller, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Milton Parks appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against several prison officials. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The unpublished opinion indicates that Parks alleged civil rights violations related to his imprisonment but both the district court and appellate court ruled in favor of the defendant prison officials.

    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. 06-6443

    MILTON PARKS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    GARY R. MILLER; HARRY DAVIS, CPT.; MRS.
    CROUCH;
    OFFICER
    KILLIAN;
    CAROLYN
    DAVIS,
    Programmer; JOHN DOE, Grievance Examiner,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District


    District of North Carolina, at Durham.
    District Judge. (1:04-cv-00487-JAB)

    Submitted: June 15, 2006

    Court for the Middle


    James A. Beaty, Jr.,

    Decided: June 21, 2006

    Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Milton Parks, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Harper Graham, Assistant


    Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Milton Parks appeals the district courts order accepting
    the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on
    his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.
    and find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record

    Accordingly, we affirm for the

    reasons stated by the district court.


    1:04-cv-00487-JAB (M.D.N.C. Mar. 1, 2006).

    Parks v. Miller, No.


    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like