Anthony Ikezau Odiana v. Carolyn v. Rickards, Warden Brian Smith, Case Manager

Submitted Aug. 22, 1996. Decided Sept. 4, 1996.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1996-09-04

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently June 2006 · most notably United States v. Gregg (2006), United States v. Gary Hatfield (1996)

30 federal appellate ·

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1996-09-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Anthony Ikezau Odiana, Appellant Pro Se.

Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his Bivens* complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Odiana v. Rickards, No. CA-96-112 (E.D.Va. Mar. 13, 1996). 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

See Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)