Filed: Nov. 10, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7069 JIMMY WESTFALL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus CECIL H. UNDERWOOD, Governor; SANDRA ILDERTON, Chairperson, West Virginia Parole Board, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Beckley. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (CA-99-370-5) Submitted: November 4, 1999 Decided: November 10, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Di
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7069 JIMMY WESTFALL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus CECIL H. UNDERWOOD, Governor; SANDRA ILDERTON, Chairperson, West Virginia Parole Board, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Beckley. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (CA-99-370-5) Submitted: November 4, 1999 Decided: November 10, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dis..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7069 JIMMY WESTFALL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus CECIL H. UNDERWOOD, Governor; SANDRA ILDERTON, Chairperson, West Virginia Parole Board, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Beckley. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (CA-99-370-5) Submitted: November 4, 1999 Decided: November 10, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jimmy Westfall, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Jimmy Westfall, a West Virginia inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Westfall v. Underwood, No. CA-99-370-5 (S.D.W. Va. July 22, 1999). 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. DISMISSED 2