From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marron v. Miller

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Dec 10, 2014
587 F. App'x 69 (4th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 14-7008

12-10-2014

TRAVIS J. MARRON, a/k/a Abdul Mu'Min, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GUARD, SGT., MILLER; GUARD FLAVIN, Defendants - Appellees.

Travis J. Marron, Appellant Pro Se. Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.


UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Glen E. Conrad, Chief District Judge. (7:13-cv-00338-GEC-RSB) Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Travis J. Marron, Appellant Pro Se. Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Travis J. Marron appeals the district court's order denying relief on this action arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Marron v. Miller, No. 7:13-cv-00338-GEC-RSB (W.D. Va. June 24, 2014). We dispense with 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


Summaries of

Marron v. Miller

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Dec 10, 2014
587 F. App'x 69 (4th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

Marron v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:TRAVIS J. MARRON, a/k/a Abdul Mu'Min, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GUARD…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Dec 10, 2014

Citations

587 F. App'x 69 (4th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

Collins v. Williams

"No substantial burden occurs if the government action merely makes the religious exercise more expensive or…

Carter v. Div. of Corr.

Thus, the defendants assert that the plaintiff cannot establish the subjective prong of the deliberate…