Court Opinion

ID: 12765
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 06:20:47+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:03:51.527205
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                     _______________________

                           No. 96-20804
                         Summary Calendar
                     _______________________

                    HOWARD VANZANDT WILLIAMS,

                                                Plaintiff-Appellant,

                             versus

    ARIEL OBREGON, also known as Oberson; JOHN M. TOLLINSON;
                CULLEN N. HARRIS, III, LISA BRIM,

                                               Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                for the Southern District of Texas
                          (H-93-CV-3959)
_________________________________________________________________
                          August 6, 1997

Before JONES, DeMOSS, AND PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

          Appellant Howard Vanzandt Williams, an inmate of the

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division

(“TDCJ-ID”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this

lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that appellees

     *
      Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Ariel Obregon, John Tollinson, Cullen N. Harris, and Lisa Brim,

all employees of the TDCJ-ID, were involved in a conspiracy to

retaliate against him in violation of his constitutional rights.

Appellant also complains that the district court erred in

refusing his request to supplement his complaint.   Having

considered appellant’s position in light of the briefs and

pertinent portions of the record, we find no reversible error of

fact or law and affirm for essentially the reasons stated by the

district court.

          AFFIRMED.

                                2