Richardson-Bey v. Beck, (4th Cir. 2001)
Linked as:
Text
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7005 LEROY RICHARDSON-BEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus
THEODIS BECK; JAMES B. FRENCH; LYNN OEHLING;
MARY LOU ROGERS; BONNIE BOYETTE; DENNIS M. ROWLAND; J. BLANGO; F. BROWN, Lieutenant;
SERGEANT WATSON; DAVID YATES; SUPERINTENDENT
GRIMM; CYNTHIA BUTLER BOSTIC; R. B. LEE,
Captain; ELIZABETH LAYCOCK; G. L. WOODARD,
Superintendent; C. BATTEN; FRAN MINSHEW; RICK
JACKSON, Superintendent; JULIA BRIGMAN; THOMAS
J. ANDREWS; MR. WILKERSON; HATTIE B. PIMPONG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
Judge. (CA-01-262)
Submitted: September 6, 2001 Decided: September 14, 2001
Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leroy Richardson-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM
Leroy Richardson-Bey appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) 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. Richardson-Bey v. Beck , No. CA-01-262 (E.D.N.C. May 30, 2001). 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
Sponsored links
