Manning v. Virginia Dept. of Corrections, et al, No. 7:2017cv00103 - Document 18 (W.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief United States District Judge Glen E. Conrad on 5/11/2017. (tvt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
O FRK' OFFI U.. BI COUU S CE S DI AT ROANOKE, VA Fi LED I TH E UN I N TED STATE S D I STR I CO U R T CT FO R TH E W E STER N DI STR I O F V I G I I CT R N A R O A N O K E DI SI N W O DOUGLAS R.M ANNI NG, MAt 11 2 1 27 JUL C. DL , I CL BY; CASE NO.7: 17CV001 03 Pl ntf , ai if M EM O M N D U M O PI I N N O W RGI A DEPT.OF CORRECTI NI ONS, c K , By: Gln E. nr d e Co a Chi fU nied St e D i t i tJudge e t at s s r c Dee fndants. t) Do l s R.M an ng,a Vigi a i t pr ee ng pr K ,fl t s cvi rght a ton ug a ni r ni nma e oc di o ied hi i l i s c i ptrua t 42 U. C.j1983,algi t thehasha difc te i prs i o ani lgal ls nt o S. le ng ha d fiulis n ion n bti ng e r s r h matra s a s ndi l ga m alt t co t. Upon r vi w oft r c d,t c t e ea c e i l nd e ng e l i o he urs e e he e or he our tndst tM a ng' c am sagans t def nda sheha nn e mus be s ma y dim is d. i ha nni s l i i t wo e nt s /m d t um dl s s e The c t i r quie t dimi s a a ton o c am fl d by a prs r agans a our s e r d o s s ny c i r l i ie ipne i t gover nt le iy orofke i t c tde e nest a ton o cli i i ous m ai i , nme a ntt l r f he our t nni he c i r am s vol , lcous o f i t sae acam u o whih rle ma beg a td r al o tt li p n c eif y r ne .28U. C.j 1 5 b ( ) M a nig s S. 91 A( )1. n n h sn lg lb ssf rj 1 8 camsa an tteVignaDe a t n o Co rcin (E a o e a a i o 9 3 li g i s h r i i p rme t f re to s : VDOC' ' ) o Dil n Co o a Ce tr G'lih r a S ae no i o t as a t i ter o f a r l wy nxdin l ne . iN et e l tt r t fkil ci n h i fkil s ng c p cte ae Ees n 'u e j 1 8 , a d ti r l as a pisE o r me tle t ista ae a a iis r p ro s nd r 9 35 n l s u e lo p l G ven n a ni e h t r 5 l e g t consde ed t r oft St t f rElve h Amendme pur e .' W ilv.M i hi a Dep' of i r a ms he ae' o e nt nt pos s' l c gn t S ae Po ie 4 U. 5 ,7 - ( 9 9 . Be a s t VDOC a d te p io ae p o e l tt lc , 91 S. 8 0 71 1 8 ) c u e he n h rs n r r p ry Manning v. Virginia Dept. of Corrections, et al ' Doc. 18 c i r n of t Commonwe 1h of Vigi a,t y cn onsdeed nns he at r ni he nnot be s d unde j 1 3. ue r 98 The ef r ,t cour wilsl a iy dim isa fi ousM n ng' co tt i lca msagans r o e he t l lmm rl s s s rvol nni s nsiutona li i t t s t de e nt .An a o it or rwile e t sda he e wo f nda s ppr pra e de l nt r hi y. Dockets.Justia.com ' W ad n Lar T.Ed n si a p ro s be tt s i t e j 1 3 a d M a nn ma r e ry mo d s es n u j c o ut md r 98 , n n ig y c niu wi h sj1 8 camsa ans ti d f n a ta t i tme By spaaeo d r t ec u t o tn e t i 9 3 li g i t h s e e d n t hs i . h e rt r e, h o r wildiec t c e kt a tm pts r i e ofpr e sont wa den. l r t he l r o te e vc oc s he r The Cl r i dieced t s nd co e of t s m e o a um opi on a ac om pa ng ek s r t o e pi s hi m r nd ni nd c nyi or rt pl i if de o antf. ENTER:Thi t da ofM a , 2017. s t y y Chi fU t St t sDititJ e ed a e src udge 1 h I l I ., : ; ! : . I ! 2
]]>
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.
