Summary
describing the DJJ as "an agency of the Commonwealth"
Summary of this case from Johnson v. FloydOpinion
No. 15-2123
03-09-2016
JOSEPH L. BOYKIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE; ANDREW BLOCK, Director, in his official and individual capacity; MARK GOOCH, Director, in his individual capacity; ERIC TIGNOR, Department Investigator, in his official and individual capacity; COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, BEAUMONT JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL CENTER; PEGGY PARRISH, Superintendent, in her official and individual capacity; CHARLES DOCKERY, Superintendent, in his individual capacity; DAVID GRUBICH, Assistant Superintendent, in his individual capacity; AARON DIXON, Assistant Superintendent, in his official capacity; LAKARA JOHNSON, Lieutenant, in her official and individual capacity, Defendants - Appellees.
Joseph L. Boykin, Appellant Pro Se. Ryan Spreague Hardy, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:14-cv-00811-HEH) Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph L. Boykin, Appellant Pro Se. Ryan Spreague Hardy, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Joseph L. Boykin appeals the district court's orders substituting proper party-defendants, granting Defendants' motion to dismiss Boykin's complaint, and denying as moot Boykin's miscellaneous motions. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Boykin v. Commonwealth of Va. Dep't of Juvenile Justice, No. 3:14-cv-00811-HEH (E.D. Va. Aug. 20, 2015). We deny Boykin's motion for appointment of counsel. We deny his motion to schedule oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED