Gill v. Rhode Island
Case Date: 02/12/1997
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 96-1958
|
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 96-1958 DONALD GILL, JOHN CARLEVALE, SR., ROBERT PLANTE, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, ET AL., Defendants, Appellees. ___________________ JOSEPH DEVINE, ET AL., Plaintiffs, Appellees. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND [Hon. Francis J. Boyle, Senior U.S. District Judge] __________________________ ____________________ Before Selya, Cyr and Boudin, Circuit Judges. ______________ ____________________ Donald Gill, John M. Carlevale and Robert F. Plante on brief pro ___________ __________________ _________________ se. Jeffrey B. Pine, Attorney General, Thomas A. Palombo, Special ________________ __________________ Assistant Attorney General, Katherine A. Merolla and Pucci, Goldin & _____________________ ________________ Merolla, Counsel to Secretary of State, on brief for appellees, State _______ of Rhode Island, Governor Lincoln Almond, James R. Langevin, Secretary of State, and The Members of The General Assembly. Robert E. Craven and Giannini Craven Vieira & Digianfilippo on ________________ ________________________________________ brief for appellees, Roger Begin, Chairman of The Rhode Island State Board of Elections. Robert D. Fine and Tillinghast Licht & Semonoff on brief for _______________ _______________________________ appellees, John Holmes, Chairman of The Rhode Island Republican State Central Committee, and Guy Dufault, Chairman of The Rhode Island Democratic State Committee. ____________________ February 6, 1997 ____________________ Per Curiam. Plaintiffs, Donald Gill, John M. Carlevale __________ Sr., and Robert F. Plante, have appealed a district court judgment declaring constitutional certain provisions of the Rhode Island election laws. Gill v. Rhode Island, 933 F. ____ _____________ Supp. 151 (D.R.I. 1996). On appeal, appellants have presented no cogent argument supported by legal authority to challenge the court's ruling and we, therefore, have no basis on which to find any error. Affirmed. _________ -3- |