Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
05-7823•Michael Lynn Brown v. TRACY S. RAY, Warden
05-7823Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit30.03.2006
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7823
MICHAEL LYNN BROWN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
TRACY S. RAY, Warden,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
Judge. (CA-05-657-7-JCT)
Submitted: March 23, 2006 Decided: March 30, 2006
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Lynn Brown, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Michael Lynn Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s
order construing his petitions for a writ of mandamus as a civil
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000), and dismissing Brown’s
action for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be
granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2000). We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. See Brown v. Ray, No.
CA-05-657-7-JCT (W.D. Va. Nov. 14, 2005). 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 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.