Guy Carmichael CRENSHAW, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Unknown and unnamed John and Jane Doe Attorneys and Officers; Cumberland County Sheriffs Department, Unknown and unnamed John and Jane Doe Sheriffs Officers; Cumberland County, and Federal Drug Enforcement Team, unknown and unnamed John and Jane Doe Agents; Steven D. Goodwin; Douglas P. McGee; Saad El Amin; James S. Gilmore, III, Governor; Buckingham County Sheriffs Department; Farmville Police Department; Claude Meinhart; Rodney Davenport; Travis Gilliam; Todd Phillips; Dennis Ownby, Cumberland County Sheriffs Office; Patricia Sales, Commonwealth Attorney; Janet Reno, Department of Justice; Edgar M. Wright, Defendants-Appellees

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit2001-05-22No. No. 00-7522

10 F. App'x 148

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

PER CURIAM.

Guy Carmichael Crenshaw appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1988 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Crenshaw v. Virginia, No. CA-00-719-7 (W.D.Va. Sept. 15, 2000). We deny Crenshaw’s motion for 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.