Filed: Jan. 28, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7172 GREGORY MAURICE LEE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DANIEL L. STIENEKE, Director of Prisons; FRANKLIN FREEMAN; LYNN PHILLIPS, Ex-Director of Prisons, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CA-97-282-3-MU) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 28, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Ju
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7172 GREGORY MAURICE LEE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DANIEL L. STIENEKE, Director of Prisons; FRANKLIN FREEMAN; LYNN PHILLIPS, Ex-Director of Prisons, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CA-97-282-3-MU) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 28, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Jud..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7172 GREGORY MAURICE LEE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DANIEL L. STIENEKE, Director of Prisons; FRANKLIN FREEMAN; LYNN PHILLIPS, Ex-Director of Prisons, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, District Judge. (CA-97-282-3-MU) Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 28, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gregory Maurice Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant, a North Carolina inmate, appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) com- plaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2) (West Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court.* Lee v. Stieneke, No. CA-97-282-3- MU (W.D.N.C. July 21, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED * To the extent Appellant appeals the district court's order waiving his partial filing fee and ordering transmission of partial payments from his trust account to the court, this relief is also denied. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(b) (West Supp. 1997). 2