Case Name: James A. PAULING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Charles Molony Condon, South Carolina Attorney General; John Potterfield, Deputy Public Defender, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-03-21
Citations: 6 F. App'x 142
Docket Number: No. 01-6128
Parties: James A. PAULING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Charles Molony Condon, South Carolina Attorney General; John Potterfield, Deputy Public Defender, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 6
Pages: 142–142

Head Matter:
James A. PAULING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Charles Molony Condon, South Carolina Attorney General; John Potterfield, Deputy Public Defender, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-6128.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 9, 2001.
Decided March 21, 2001.
James A. Pauling, pro se.
Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
James A. Pauling appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Pauling v. South Carolina, No. CA-00-2412-2-22AJ (D.S.C. Nov. 28, 2000). 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.