Williams v. Angelone
| H. R. POWELL, Warden, Southampton Correctional Center, R. A. YOUNG, Regional Director of Virginia Department of Corrections, L. W. JARVIS, Warden at Bland Correctional Center, CLARENCE A. HOLLAR, Assistant Warden of Programs at Bland Correctional Center, RUFUS FLEMING, in his individual and official capacity as the Regional Director, WENDELL W. PIXLEY, Lieutenant of Southampton Correctional Center, J. BARNES, Lieutenant at Southampton Correctional Center, F. E. LOCKHART, Treatment Program Supervisor at Bland Correctional Center, RONALD J. ANGELONE, in his individual and official capacity, JOHN DOE, Correctional Officer, WRSP, HAMPTON, Sergeant, WRSP, OFFICER MCKINNEY, WRSP, A. P. HARVEY, WRSP, H. O. YATES, Major, WRSP U, H. O. YATES, WRSP, SERGEANT WILKINS, WRSP, GENE M. JOHNSON, J. MINTON, WRSP, KISER, Correctional Officer, WRSP, H. J. HICKMAN, Captain at Bland Correctional Center, S. K. YOUNG, WRSP, R. SNIDER, Lieutenant, SERGEANT COLLINS, WRSP, COLLEN, Correctional Officer, WRSP and K. A. POLINSKY, Asssistant Warden of Programs at Bland Correctional Center |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| ELTON LEE WILLIAMS |
| 06-6740 |
| April 27, 2006 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit |
| Prison Condition |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| Williams v. Angelone |
| Williams v. Angelone |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
403253264
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:01-cv-00274-JCT Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998549098]. Mailed to: Elton Williams. [06-6740]
|
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
