Filed: Dec. 08, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6752 DOSSIE FAISON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus YVONNE ELSWICK; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; P. TRUE; RICHARD A. YOUNG; J. ARMENTROUT; J. BENTLEY; GARY BUNN; RON ANGELONE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-00381-7) Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 8, 2000 Before NIEMEYER, LUT
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6752 DOSSIE FAISON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus YVONNE ELSWICK; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; P. TRUE; RICHARD A. YOUNG; J. ARMENTROUT; J. BENTLEY; GARY BUNN; RON ANGELONE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-00381-7) Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 8, 2000 Before NIEMEYER, LUTT..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-6752 DOSSIE FAISON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus YVONNE ELSWICK; DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; P. TRUE; RICHARD A. YOUNG; J. ARMENTROUT; J. BENTLEY; GARY BUNN; RON ANGELONE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-00381-7) Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 8, 2000 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dossie Faison, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Dossie Faison, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Faison v. Elswick, No. CA-00-00381-7 (W.D. Va. May 19, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
