Filed: Nov. 29, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7109 ABDUR R. SHABAZZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HELEN F. FAHEY, Chairwoman, Virginia Pardon and Parole Board; GENE JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-04-344-2) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 29, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7109 ABDUR R. SHABAZZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HELEN F. FAHEY, Chairwoman, Virginia Pardon and Parole Board; GENE JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-04-344-2) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 29, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7109 ABDUR R. SHABAZZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HELEN F. FAHEY, Chairwoman, Virginia Pardon and Parole Board; GENE JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-04-344-2) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 29, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Abdur R. Shabazz, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Abdur R. Shabazz appeals the district court’s order that dismissed his action, which the court construed as filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Shabazz v. Fahey, No. CA-04-344-2 (E.D. Va. June 21, 2004). 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 -
