Filed: Sep. 23, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6966 HENRY CLIFFORD BYRD, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CATHERINE C. EAGLES; W. DANIEL FLOYD; RICHARD E. PARROSH; HENRY E. FRYE, JR., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-1110-1) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6966 HENRY CLIFFORD BYRD, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CATHERINE C. EAGLES; W. DANIEL FLOYD; RICHARD E. PARROSH; HENRY E. FRYE, JR., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-1110-1) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affir..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6966 HENRY CLIFFORD BYRD, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CATHERINE C. EAGLES; W. DANIEL FLOYD; RICHARD E. PARROSH; HENRY E. FRYE, JR., Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-03-1110-1) Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Clifford Byrd, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Henry Clifford Byrd, Sr., appeals the district court’s order dismissing as frivolous his “criminal complaint.” Our review of the record and the district court opinion adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Byrd v. Eagles, No. CA-03-1110-1 (M.D.N.C. filed May 3, 2004 & entered May 4, 2004). 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 -
