Filed: Feb. 02, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7452 DAVID WILSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GENE JOHNSON, Director of the Department of Corrections of Virginia; HELEN F. FAHEY, Chairwoman for the Parole Board of Virginia, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-05-842-1-GBL) Submitted: January 26, 2006 Decided: February 2, 2006 Before LUTTIG, WILLI
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7452 DAVID WILSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GENE JOHNSON, Director of the Department of Corrections of Virginia; HELEN F. FAHEY, Chairwoman for the Parole Board of Virginia, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (CA-05-842-1-GBL) Submitted: January 26, 2006 Decided: February 2, 2006 Before LUTTIG, WILLIA..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7452
DAVID WILSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GENE JOHNSON, Director of the Department of
Corrections of Virginia; HELEN F. FAHEY,
Chairwoman for the Parole Board of Virginia,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District
Judge. (CA-05-842-1-GBL)
Submitted: January 26, 2006 Decided: February 2, 2006
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Wilson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
David Wilson appeals the district court’s order denying
his action, filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000), challenging
the decisions and procedures of the Virginia Parole Board. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Wilson v.
Johnson, No. CA-05-842-1-GBL (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 26, 2005 &
entered Aug. 29, 2005). We reject Wilson’s contention that the
Supreme Court’s decision in Wilkinson v. Dotson,
125 S. Ct. 1242
(2005), renders the district court’s decision incorrect. We deny
Wilson’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis as unnecessary in view
of his PLRA status. 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 -