Filed: Dec. 08, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6828 COLON ALSTON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TILLERY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; JOHN R. WILLIAMS; MR. GAYLOR; MRS. BROWN; MR. BABB, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-162-5-BR) Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 8, 2000 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judg
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6828 COLON ALSTON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TILLERY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; JOHN R. WILLIAMS; MR. GAYLOR; MRS. BROWN; MR. BABB, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-162-5-BR) Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 8, 2000 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judge..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6828 COLON ALSTON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TILLERY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; JOHN R. WILLIAMS; MR. GAYLOR; MRS. BROWN; MR. BABB, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-162-5-BR) Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 8, 2000 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Colon Alston, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Colon Alston, Jr., a North Carolina inmate, appeals the dis- trict court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Alston v. Tillery Corr. Inst., No. CA-00-162-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Apr. 20, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2