Filed: Dec. 10, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7563 ALEXANDER PERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN BRYANT; J. KORNEGAY; OFFICER ELLIOTT; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Divi- sion of Prison, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-01-522) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 10, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7563 ALEXANDER PERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN BRYANT; J. KORNEGAY; OFFICER ELLIOTT; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Divi- sion of Prison, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-01-522) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 10, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS,..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7563 ALEXANDER PERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN BRYANT; J. KORNEGAY; OFFICER ELLIOTT; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Divi- sion of Prison, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-01-522) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 10, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alexander Person, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Alexander Person, a North Carolina inmate, appeals the dis- trict court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2001). 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. Person v. Bryant, No. CA-01-522 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 24, 2001). 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
