Case Name: Stephan D. BROOKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John DOE, Law Enforcement Officer; R.G. Buening, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-07-25
Citations: 41 F. App'x 682
Docket Number: No. 02-6797
Parties: Stephan D. BROOKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John DOE, Law Enforcement Officer; R.G. Buening, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 41
Pages: 682–682

Head Matter:
Stephan D. BROOKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John DOE, Law Enforcement Officer; R.G. Buening, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-6797.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted July 18, 2002.
Decided July 25, 2002.
Stephan D. Brooks, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Harcourt Fulton, Office of the City Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina; Frank Bayard Aycock, III, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Stephan D. Brooks appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2002) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2) (West Supp.2002). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Brooks v. Doe, No. CA-98-460-3-2MU (W.D.N.C. filed Apr. 30, 2002 & entered May 2, 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.