Filed: Dec. 31, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7203 VINCENT JOHN HALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KEVIN GRANT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-02-817) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 31, 2002 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7203 VINCENT JOHN HALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KEVIN GRANT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-02-817) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 31, 2002 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7203 VINCENT JOHN HALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KEVIN GRANT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-02-817) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 31, 2002 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent John Hall, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Vincent John Hall appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies his complaint asserting denial of a parole hearing. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Hall v. Grant, No. CA-02-817 (D.S.C. July 31, 2002). 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 2
