Joe Lee Fulgham v. Edward W. Murray, Director of System
Joe Lee Fulgham v. Edward W. Murray, Director of System
Opinion
993 F.2d 1536
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Joe Lee FULGHAM, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Edward W. MURRAY, Director of System, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 93-6320.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 3, 1993
Decided: May 28, 1993
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Richard B. Kellam, Senior District Judge. (CA-93-238-2)
Joe Lee Fulgham, Appellant Pro Se.
E.D.Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before RUSSELL and HALL, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
OPINION
Joe Lee Fulgham appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit.* Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Fulgham v. Murray, No. CA-93-238-2 (E.D. Va. Mar. 29, 1993). We deny Fulgham's motion for 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
We also note that because the core of Fulgham's complaint sought his release from confinement, it could have been dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies. See Todd v. Baskerville, 712 F.2d 70 (4th Cir. 1983)
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.