Case ID: f-appx_48/html/0074-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Darryl ALLMOND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALEXANDRIA SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; Edward J. Prokop, Chief Deputy; John Kapetanis, Sargeant; George A. Gray, Deputy; Darren Hinzman, Deputy, Defendants-Appellees. Darryl Allmond, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Alexandria Sheriff’s Department; Edward J. Prokop, Chief Deputy; John Kapetanis, Sargeant; George A. Gray, Deputy; Darren Hinzman, Deputy, Defendants-Appellees. Darryl Allmond, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Alexandria Sheriff’s Department; Edward J. Prokop, Chief Deputy; John Kapetanis, Sargeant; George A. Gray, Deputy; Darren Hinzman, Deputy, Defendants-Appellees.
    Nos. 02-1665, 02-1666, 02-1827.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Oct. 10, 2002.
    Decided Oct. 16, 2002.
    Darryl Allmond, Appellant Pro Se. Christina Elaine Kearney, Shuford, Rubin & Gibney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
    Before WILLIAMS, KING and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Darryl Allmond appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Allmond v. Alexandria Sherriffs Dep’t, No. CA-02-309-A (E.D. Va. filed June 4, 2002 & entered June 10, 2002; June 7 & July 11, 2002). 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.