Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 17 views

    Tehgrain Jones v. Charlotte Purkey, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Tehgrain Jones' post-judgment motions in his case against Charlotte Purkey and others. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the reasons provided by the district court in its order denying the motions. As the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials before the court, oral argument was not necessary.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Tehgrain Jones v. Charlotte Purkey, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    17 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Tehgrain Jones' post-judgment motions in his case against Charlotte Purkey and others. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the reasons provided by the district court in its order denying the motions. As the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials before the court, oral argument was not necessary.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2013-02-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-7956

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Tehgrain Jones' post-judgment motions in his case against Charlotte Purkey and others. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the reasons provided by the district court in its order denying the motions. As the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials before the court, oral argument was not necessary.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    17 views2 pages

    Tehgrain Jones v. Charlotte Purkey, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Tehgrain Jones' post-judgment motions in his case against Charlotte Purkey and others. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the reasons provided by the district court in its order denying the motions. As the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the materials before the court, oral argument was not necessary.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 12-7956

    TEHGRAIN JAMAL JONES,


    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    CHARLOTTE H. PURKEY, Commonwealth of VA; LOUIS A. SHERMAN,
    Judge; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate
    Judge. (3:12-cv-00306-HEH)

    Submitted:

    February 11, 2013

    Decided:

    February 15, 2013

    Before DAVIS, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Tehgrain Jamal Jones, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Tehgrain

    Jones

    appeals

    the

    district

    denying various post-judgment motions.


    record and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for


    Jones v. Purkey, No.

    3:12-cv-00306-HEH (E.D. Va. Nov. 6, 2012).


    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    order

    We have reviewed the

    the reasons stated by the district court.

    oral

    courts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with
    contentions
    this

    court

    are
    and

    argument would not aid the decisional process.


    AFFIRMED

    You might also like