Case Name: Mark Steven STANTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Boyd BENNETT; Bonnie Boyette; Edward Conn; R. Rich; Jay Clark, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-03-13
Citations: 59 F. App'x 593
Docket Number: No. 02-7704
Parties: Mark Steven STANTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Boyd BENNETT; Bonnie Boyette; Edward Conn; R. Rich; Jay Clark, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 59
Pages: 593–593

Head Matter:
Mark Steven STANTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Boyd BENNETT; Bonnie Boyette; Edward Conn; R. Rich; Jay Clark, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-7704.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 6, 2008.
Decided March 13, 2003.
Mark Steven Stanton, Appellant Pro Se. James Philip Allen, Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Mark Steven Stanton 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 Stanton v. Bennett, No. CA-01-546-5-BO (E.D.N.C. filed Oct. 25, 2002, entered Oct. 29, 2002). We deny the motion for appointment of counsel. 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.