Case ID: f-appx_55/html/0166-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PEE CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William S. PARKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Roy W. CHERRY, Superintendent; E. Taylor, Captain; S. Reeves, Sergeant; A. Willis, Officer, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 02-7650.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 16, 2003.
    Decided Jan. 27, 2003.
    William S. Parker, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PEE CURIAM.

William S. Parker appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Parker v. Cherry, No. CA-02-1345-AM (E.D.Va. Sept. 23, 2002). 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.