Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    Hooker v. Jarvis, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Barry Lynn Hooker's appeal of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's rulings, finding no reversible error. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, 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

    You might also like

    Hooker v. Jarvis, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Barry Lynn Hooker's appeal of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's rulings, finding no reversible error. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-07-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-6438

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Barry Lynn Hooker's appeal of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's rulings, finding no reversible error. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, 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
    Download as pdf
    5 views2 pages

    Hooker v. Jarvis, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Barry Lynn Hooker's appeal of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's rulings, finding no reversible error. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, 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
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-6438

    BARRY LYNN HOOKER,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    L. W. JARVIS, Warden, Bland Correctional
    Center; R. S. JACKSON; DONNA MILLER,
    Institutional Hearings Officer; LARRY W.
    HUFFMAN,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, District Judge.
    (CA-03-703-7)

    Submitted:

    July 15, 2004

    Decided:

    July 21, 2004

    Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Barry Lynn Hooker, Appellant Pro Se. William W. Muse, Assistant


    Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Barry Lynn Hooker appeals the district courts orders
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.

    We have

    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we

    affirm on the reasoning of the district court.

    See Hooker v.

    Jarvis, No. CA-03-703-7 (W.D. Va. filed Feb. 19, 2004; entered Feb.
    20, 2004 & filed March 30, 2004; entered March 31, 2004).

    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