Acevedo v. Gilmore, (4th Cir. 2006)
Linked as:
Text
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7217
JAIME ACEVEDO,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JAMES S. GILMORE, III; HARRY L. CARRICO, Chief
Justice, Supreme Court of Virginia; ROBERT J.
STUMP, Judge, Wise County Circuit Court; FORD
C. QUILLEN, Judge, Wise County Circuit Court;
MOSBY G. PERROW, III, Judge, Lynchburg City
Circuit Court; MARK L. EARLEY, Attorney
General; PAMELA A. SARGENT, Assistant Virginia
Attorney General; CHRISTOPHER G. HILL,
Assistant Virginia Attorney General; ROBERT
BAIN SMITH, Assistant Virginia Attorney
General; CLINTON R. SHAW, JR., Public
Defender; B. LEIGH DREWRY, JR., Esquire;
RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia
Department of Corrections; FRED SCHILLING,
Director, Health Services, Virginia Department
of Corrections; J. MICHAEL GAMBLE, Judge,
Amherst County Circuit Court; RICHARD A.
YOUNG, Director, Western Region, Virginia
Department of Corrections; PAGE TRUE, Former
Warden, Red Onion State Prison; D. A. BRAXTON,
Warden, Red Onion State Prison; J. ARMENTROUT,
Assistant Warden, Red Onion State Prison; P.
SAUL, Grievance Coordinator, Red Onion State
Prison; ASSISTANT WARDEN BASS; VICKI PHIPPS,
Red Onion State Prison; DOCTOR OFOHG, Red
Onion State Prison; JANE DOE, Registered
Nurse, Red Onion State Prison; R. FLEMING,
Chief of Security, Red Onion State Prison;
CAPTAIN FLEMING, Red Onion State Prison; S.
FLEMING, Red Onion State Prison; D. FLEMING,
a/k/a Prison Guard Fleming, Red Onion State
Prison; SERGEANT O'QUINN, Red Onion State
Prison; SERGEANT FANNIN, Red Onion State Prison; GRIEVANCE COORDINATOR SLEENOR; SERGEANT HILLYARD, Red Onion State Prison; PRISON GUARD TILLER; PRISON GUARD KILBOURNE; CARL SYKES, Maintenance, Red Onion State Prison; SERGEANT WOOD, Red Onion State Prison; PRISON GUARD DEEL; PRISON GUARD BUSH; COLLINS, Prison Guard; PRISON GUARD ELY, Red Onion State Prison; VASS; PHYLLIS HOBBS; DIANAH ROSE; TAMMY THOMAS; MARY TAYLOR; KENNETH TAYLOR; LESLIE BAKER; RUVONDA MOOREFIELD; TERRY BROOKS; LISA YATES; DIANNA YATES; KAVEN O'FOGH; MAJOR YATES; SERGEANT ROSE; LIEUTENANT ROSE; T. BAKER; BASS; FLANNERY; B. SPEARS; NURSE P. ADAMS; A. BRUCE DOTSON; L. KILGORE; J. CANTRELL; D. LESTER; E. SALYERS; M.
HAMILTON, Correctional Officer; C. STANLEY; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; NURSE MEADE; NURSE COX, Defendants - Appellees, and STAN K. YOUNG, Warden, Wallens Ridge State Prison; B. J. RAVILEE, Grievance Coordinator, Wallens Ridge State Prison; GRIEVANCE COORDINATOR, RIDER, Wallens Ridge State Prison; JOHN DOE, Institutional Investigator, Wallens Ridge State Prison; CAPTAIN HOCKETT, Wallens Ridge State Prison; LIEUTENANT MEYER, Wallens Ridge State Prison; SERGEANT KENDRICK, Wallens Ridge State Prison; PRISON GUARD KELLY, Wallens Ridge State Prison; PRISON GUARD FLEENOR; PRISON GUARD SCHLOBOHM; JOHN DOE, Prison Guard, Wallens Ridge State Prison; JOHN DOE, Prison Guard 2, Wallens Ridge State Prison; JOHN DOE, Prison Guard 3, Wallens Ridge State Prison; SERGEANT HEAD, Wallens Ridge State Prison; SERGEANT SHORT, Wallens Ridge State Prison; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BROWN; NURSE THOMAS; NURSE HOBBS; NURSE BALLARD; LIEUTENANT GALLIHAR, PRISON GUARD GOINS, Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-752-7) Submitted: June 12, 2006 Decided: June 27, 2006 Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William W. Muse, Assistant Jaime Acevedo, Appellant Pro Se.
Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Mark Edward Frye, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Bristol, Tennessee; Frederick A. Rowlett, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM: Jaime Acevedo appeals numerous orders of the district court and the jury's verdict in this action filed pursuant to 42U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. 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
Sponsored links
