Ralph Acosta, Plaintiff Appellant, v. Mr. Urbanik; Larry Moody; Mr. Erickson, Defendants Appellees, 16 F.3d 408 (4th Cir. 1994)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District Judge. (CA-91-410-AM).
Ralph Acosta, appellant Pro Se.
Paula Pugh Newett, Office of the United States Atty., Alexandria, VA, for appellees.
E.D. Va.
AFFIRMED.
Before HALL and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Acosta v. Urbanik, No. CA-91-410-AM (E.D. Va. July 19, 1993).* 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.
We deny Acosta's motion for appointment of counsel. See Whisenant v. Yuam, 739 F.2d 160 (4th Cir. 1984)
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
