Joseph Boykin v. Commonwealth of Virginia

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999709954-2]; denying Motion to schedule oral argument [999709963-2]. Originating case number: 3:14-cv-00811-HEH. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999770694]. Mailed to: Joseph L. Boykin. [15-2123]

Appeal: 15-2123

Doc: 14

Filed: 03/09/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-2123

JOSEPH L. BOYKIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE;
ANDREW BLOCK, Director, in his official and individual
capacity; MARK GOOCH, Director, in his individual capacity;
ERIC TIGNOR, Department Investigator, in his official and
individual capacity; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
JUVENILE JUSTICE, BEAUMONT JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL CENTER;
PEGGY
PARRISH,
Superintendent,
in
her
official
and
individual capacity; CHARLES DOCKERY, Superintendent, in his
individual
capacity;
DAVID
GRUBICH,
Assistant
Superintendent, in his individual capacity; AARON DIXON,
Assistant Superintendent, in his official capacity; LAKARA
JOHNSON,
Lieutenant,
in
her
official
and
individual
capacity,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:14-cv-00811-HEH)

Submitted:

February 29, 2016

Decided:

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

March 9, 2016

Appeal: 15-2123

Doc: 14

Filed: 03/09/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

Joseph L. Boykin, Appellant Pro Se.
Ryan Spreague Hardy,
Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 15-2123

Doc: 14

Filed: 03/09/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Joseph
substituting
motion

to

L.

Boykin

proper
dismiss

appeals

no

Boykin’s

reversible

district

party-defendants,
complaint,

Boykin’s miscellaneous motions.
find

the

error.

court’s

granting
and

orders

Defendants’

denying

as

moot

We have reviewed the record and
Accordingly,

reasons stated by the district court.

we

affirm

for

the

Boykin v. Commonwealth of

Va. Dep’t of Juvenile Justice, No. 3:14-cv-00811-HEH (E.D. Va.
Aug. 20, 2015).
counsel.

We deny Boykin’s motion for appointment of

We deny his motion to schedule oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials

before

this

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional process.
AFFIRMED

3