Johnson v. Guillory ( 1997 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 97-6741
    KEVIN JOHNSON,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    DONALD R. GUILLORY, Chief Warden, Powhatan
    Correctional Center; DAVID W. BARNES, Medical
    Doctor, Powhatan Correctional Center; FRED
    SCHILLING, Health Services Director, Virginia
    Department of Corrections,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
    trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, District Judge.
    (CA-96-1175-AM)
    Submitted:   October 31, 1997          Decided:     December 18, 1997
    Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Kevin Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Carlyle Randolph Wimbish, III,
    SANDS, ANDERSON, MARKS & MILLER, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on
    his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     (1994) 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.
    Johnson v. Guillory, No. CA-96-1175-AM (E.D. Va. Apr. 9, 1997). We
    deny Appellant's motion for writ of contempt.* We also deny Appel-
    lant's motion for an order granting him unconditional in forma pau-
    peris status. 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
    *
    Appellant's "Motion for Writ of Contempt" and supporting af-
    fidavits allege, among other things, that he has been denied access
    to his legal papers and to law books, which prevented him from
    adequately preparing his informal brief for this appeal. Since this
    motion was filed, however, Appellant has filed a supplemental brief
    which supports his position and contains thorough citations to
    legal authority. We have considered the supplemental brief, so
    Appellant's appeal has not been prejudiced by any lack of access to
    materials.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 97-6741

Filed Date: 12/18/1997

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014