Johnnie Henley, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Mary Sue Terry, Attorney General of Virginia; Edward Murray,director; Franklin E. White, Secretary of Publicsafety; Julian Pugh; Russell Wilson;david Garraghty, Warden,defendants-appellees, 825 F.2d 406 (4th Cir. 1987)
Annotate this CaseJohnnie Henley, appellant pro se.
Nelson H.C. Fisher, Office of the Attorney General, for appellees.
Before RUSSELL and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
A review of the record and the magistrate's opinion discloses that this appeal from his order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is without merit. Because the judgment order does not reflect the magistrate's determination that the first claim be dismissed with prejudice and the second claim be dismissed without prejudice, we modify the judgment to reflect those determinations. We dispense with oral argument because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively and affirm the judgment, as modified, on the reasoning of the magistrate. Henley v. Terry, C/A No. 87-173-R (E.D. Va., Apr. 21, 1987).
AFFIRMED.
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.
