Case ID: f-appx_98/html/0957-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Curtis PENNINGTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. L. TAYLOR, Correctional Officer, POD Officer, Defendant—Appellee, and Mecklenburg Correctional Center; Virginia Department of Corrections, Defendants.
    No. 04-6443.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 27, 2004.
    Decided June 4, 2004.
    Curtis Pennington, Appellant pro se. Mark Ralph Davis, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Curtis Pennington 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 Pennington v. Taylor, No. CA-02-604-2 (E.D.Va. Mar. 1, 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