Filed: Aug. 08, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7336 EARL SAND, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. STEELE, Corrections Officer; L. RICKS, Corrections Officer, 6-2 Shift; DARLING, Corrections Officer; B. MOHEAD, Inmate Hearings Officer A, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-11-2) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: August 8, 2003 Before WIDENER, MI
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7336 EARL SAND, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. STEELE, Corrections Officer; L. RICKS, Corrections Officer, 6-2 Shift; DARLING, Corrections Officer; B. MOHEAD, Inmate Hearings Officer A, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-11-2) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: August 8, 2003 Before WIDENER, MIC..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7336 EARL SAND, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus S. STEELE, Corrections Officer; L. RICKS, Corrections Officer, 6-2 Shift; DARLING, Corrections Officer; B. MOHEAD, Inmate Hearings Officer A, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-11-2) Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: August 8, 2003 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Earl Sand, Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Earl Sand appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sand v. Steele, No. CA- 01-11-2 (E.D. Va. Aug. 15, 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
