1Starr Dalton v. WV Parole Board
Filing
920100222
Filed: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
February 22, 2010
No. 09-7694 (2:08-cv-01216)
1STARR DALTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WV PAROLE BOARD; CHRISTIE LOVE; PEGGY J. POPE; BRENDA J. STUCKEY; JOHN DOE #1; JOHN DOE #2, Defendants - Appellees.
O R D E R
The court amends its opinion filed January 27, 2010, as follows: On the cover sheet, the panel information is corrected to read: "Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges."
For the Court By Direction /s/ Patricia S. Connor Clerk
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7694
1STARR DALTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WV PAROLE BOARD; CHRISTIE LOVE; PEGGY J. POPE; BRENDA J. STUCKEY; JOHN DOE #1; JOHN DOE #2, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph R. Goodwin, Chief District Judge. (2:08-cv-01216)
Submitted:
January 19, 2010
Decided:
January 27, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
1Starr Dalton, Appellant Pro Se. Christopher James Sears, SHUMAN, MCCUSKEY & SLICER, PLLC, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: 1Starr Dalton appeals the district court's order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. we affirm for W. the reasons Bd., stated No. with are and by the
Accordingly, court. Va. the the the
district
Dalton v. Aug. 25, facts
Va.
Parole We
2:08-cv-01216 oral argument
(S.D.W. because in aid
2009). legal before
dispense
and
contentions the court
adequately argument
presented not
materials
would
decisional process. AFFIRMED
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?