Filed: Feb. 27, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7955 NATHAN J. YANCEY, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus V. RASCOE, Correctional Officer; I. PECK, Officer-in-Charge, Correctional Officer Super- visor; W. EPPERSON, Lieutenant, Correctional Officer Supervisor; MS. LAWRENCES, Inmate Hearings Officer; J. EVERETTE, Housing Unit Manager/Institutional Review Officer; MS. CARABELLO-FERNANDEZ, Housing Unit Manager; D. GARRAGHTY, Head Warden/Superintendent, Defendants - Appellees
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7955 NATHAN J. YANCEY, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus V. RASCOE, Correctional Officer; I. PECK, Officer-in-Charge, Correctional Officer Super- visor; W. EPPERSON, Lieutenant, Correctional Officer Supervisor; MS. LAWRENCES, Inmate Hearings Officer; J. EVERETTE, Housing Unit Manager/Institutional Review Officer; MS. CARABELLO-FERNANDEZ, Housing Unit Manager; D. GARRAGHTY, Head Warden/Superintendent, Defendants - Appellees...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7955 NATHAN J. YANCEY, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus V. RASCOE, Correctional Officer; I. PECK, Officer-in-Charge, Correctional Officer Super- visor; W. EPPERSON, Lieutenant, Correctional Officer Supervisor; MS. LAWRENCES, Inmate Hearings Officer; J. EVERETTE, Housing Unit Manager/Institutional Review Officer; MS. CARABELLO-FERNANDEZ, Housing Unit Manager; D. GARRAGHTY, Head Warden/Superintendent, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-01-1498-AM) Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 27, 2002 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathan J. Yancey, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Nathan J. Yancey, Jr., a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2001). 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. See Yancey v. Rascoe, No. CA-01-1498-AM (E.D. Va. Nov. 5, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2