Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 17 views

    Charles Hoye v. Harold Clarke, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Charles T. Hoye's appeal of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various Virginia Department of Corrections officials. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The court issued an unpublished opinion, which are not binding precedent.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Charles Hoye v. Harold Clarke, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    17 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Charles T. Hoye's appeal of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various Virginia Department of Corrections officials. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The court issued an unpublished opinion, which are not binding precedent.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2016-01-13 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-7016

    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 summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Charles T. Hoye's appeal of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various Virginia Department of Corrections officials. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The court issued an unpublished opinion, which are not binding precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    17 views3 pages

    Charles Hoye v. Harold Clarke, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Charles T. Hoye's appeal of the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against various Virginia Department of Corrections officials. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error. The appeals court dispensed with oral arguments, as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials. The court issued an unpublished opinion, which are not binding precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 15-7016

    CHARLES T. HOYE,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    HAROLD CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections;
    GARY L. BASS, Reg. Administrator, Virginia Department of
    Corrections, Central Regional Office; SAMUEL V. PRUETT,
    Warden, Coffeewood Correctional Center; I. T. GILMORE,
    Assistant Warden, Coffeewood Correctional Center; R. W.
    MARTIN, EBP/Reentry Manager, Coffeewood Correctional Center;
    D. GOURDINE, Inst. Pgms. Mgr. (IPM), Coffeewood Correctional
    Center; L. D. MOORE, Food Service Admin., Coffeewood
    Correctional Center,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Michael F. Urbanski, District
    Judge. (7:14-cv-00124-MFU)

    Submitted:

    December 29, 2015

    Before WILKINSON and


    Senior Circuit Judge.

    KEENAN,

    Decided:

    Circuit

    Judges,

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    January 13, 2016

    and

    HAMILTON,

    Charles T. Hoye,
    Senior Assistant
    Appellees.

    Appellant Pro Se.


    Attorney General,

    Richard Carson Vorhis,


    Richmond, Virginia, for

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Charles

    T.

    Hoye

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying


    relief

    on

    his

    42

    U.S.C.

    1983

    (2012)

    complaint.

    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We

    Accordingly,

    we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.


    Clarke,
    dispense

    No.

    7:14-cv-00124-MFU

    with

    contentions

    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    (W.D.

    Va.

    because

    presented

    in

    May
    the
    the

    have

    Hoye v.

    27,

    2015).

    We

    facts

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like