Filed: Apr. 17, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7194 RICHARD L. BARNES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; FAYETTE COUNTY; DANITA YOUNG; SOUTHERN REGIONAL JAIL, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-99-1039-5) Submitted: April 12, 2001 Decided: April 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7194 RICHARD L. BARNES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; FAYETTE COUNTY; DANITA YOUNG; SOUTHERN REGIONAL JAIL, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-99-1039-5) Submitted: April 12, 2001 Decided: April 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by u..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7194 RICHARD L. BARNES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA; FAYETTE COUNTY; DANITA YOUNG; SOUTHERN REGIONAL JAIL, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-99-1039-5) Submitted: April 12, 2001 Decided: April 17, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard L. Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Richard L. Barnes, a West Virginia 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 Barnes v. West Virginia, No. CA-99-1039-5 (S.D.W. Va. Aug. 15, 2000). 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. DISMISSED 2
