# Brown v. Bynum

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · August 6, 2010

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/152480

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 6, 2010
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/152480

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6538

JAMES BROWN,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

BYNUM, Lieutenant, Sussex II State Prison; HOGAN,
Ms. Sargeant, Sussex II State Prison,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (3:08-cv-00129-RLW)

Submitted: July 27, 2010 Decided: August 6, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit
Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Brown, Appellant Pro Se. William W. Muse, Banci Enga
Tewolde, Assistant Attorney Generals, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

James Brown appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

Brown v. Bynum, No. 3:08-cv-00129-RLW (E.D. Va. Mar. 10, 2010).

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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/152480. Public record. Not legal advice.