DeVinche Albritton v. Edward Wright

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:12-cv-00233-AWA-LRL. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999895733]. Mailed to: DeVinche Albritton. [15-8041]

Appeal: 15-8041

Doc: 14

Filed: 07/25/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-8041

DEVINCHE ALBRITTON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
EDWARD WRIGHT, Warden of Lawrenceville Correctional Center;
MR. MORGAN, Former Unit Manager of 30 building; MS. BACON,
Former counselor of 30 building; ALICE CRUTCHFIELD WILMOUTH;
SGT. GRAHAM, Former Sergeant of 30 building; MS. RAMSEY,
Grievance Coordinator; MS. BOONE, Institutional Ombudsman;
R. WOODSON, Regional Director Office,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Arenda L. Wright Allen,
District Judge. (2:12-cv-00233-AWA-LRL)

Submitted:

July 21, 2016

Decided:

July 25, 2016

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

DeVinche Albritton, Appellant Pro Se.
Michael Gordon Matheson,
THOMPSON
MCMULLAN
PC,
Richmond,
Virginia;
Jessica
Leigh
Berdichevsky,
OFFICE
OF
THE
ATTORNEY
GENERAL,
Richmond,
Virginia;
Kate
Elizabeth
Dwyre,
U.S.
PAROLE
COMMISSION,
Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Appeal: 15-8041

Doc: 14

Filed: 07/25/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 15-8041

Doc: 14

Filed: 07/25/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
DeVinche

Albritton

appeals

the

district

court’s

order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint.
have

reviewed

the

record

and

find

no

reversible

We

error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.

See Albritton v. Wright, No. 2:12-cv-00233-AWA-LRL (E.D.

Va. filed Dec. 4, 2015; entered Dec. 7, 2015).

We dispense with

oral

contentions

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

this

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3