Filed: Jan. 14, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7652 EDWARD BARCUS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus W. P. ROGERS, Regional Director of V.D.O.’s Division of Operations; ALTON BASKERVILLE, Warden for Powhatan Correctional Center; K. J. BESSETT, Warden for Keen Mountain Correctional Center; LARRY COLLINS, Inmate Hearings Officer at Powhatan Correctional Center; MS. GALLOWAY, Appointed Treatment Program Supervisor; LIEUTENANT MCCALLAHAN, Member of the Institutional Classificat
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7652 EDWARD BARCUS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus W. P. ROGERS, Regional Director of V.D.O.’s Division of Operations; ALTON BASKERVILLE, Warden for Powhatan Correctional Center; K. J. BESSETT, Warden for Keen Mountain Correctional Center; LARRY COLLINS, Inmate Hearings Officer at Powhatan Correctional Center; MS. GALLOWAY, Appointed Treatment Program Supervisor; LIEUTENANT MCCALLAHAN, Member of the Institutional Classificati..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7652 EDWARD BARCUS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus W. P. ROGERS, Regional Director of V.D.O.’s Division of Operations; ALTON BASKERVILLE, Warden for Powhatan Correctional Center; K. J. BESSETT, Warden for Keen Mountain Correctional Center; LARRY COLLINS, Inmate Hearings Officer at Powhatan Correctional Center; MS. GALLOWAY, Appointed Treatment Program Supervisor; LIEUTENANT MCCALLAHAN, Member of the Institutional Classification Authority; B. MORRANNO; MR. HAMMONDS, Assigned Counselor for Special Housing Unit, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (CA-04-547-2) Submitted: December 23, 2004 Decided: January 14, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward Barcus, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Edward Barcus appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Barcus v. Rogers, No. CA- 04-547-2 (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 24, 2004; entered Sept. 27, 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 - 3 -