Case Name: Edward Lonnie MCCARROLL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jim HUNT, Governor; Mike Easley, Attorney General; Theotis Beck, Secretary of Corrections; Boyd Bennett, Director of Prisons; James French, Superintendent; Rafael Hall, Superintendent, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-07-20
Citations: 14 F. App'x 236
Docket Number: No. 01-6872
Parties: Edward Lonnie MCCARROLL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jim HUNT, Governor; Mike Easley, Attorney General; Theotis Beck, Secretary of Corrections; Boyd Bennett, Director of Prisons; James French, Superintendent; Rafael Hall, Superintendent, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 14
Pages: 236–236

Head Matter:
Edward Lonnie MCCARROLL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jim HUNT, Governor; Mike Easley, Attorney General; Theotis Beck, Secretary of Corrections; Boyd Bennett, Director of Prisons; James French, Superintendent; Rafael Hall, Superintendent, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-6872.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted July 12, 2001.
Decided July 20, 2001.
Edward Lonnie McCarroll, pro se.
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Edward Lonnie McCarroll appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000) complaint, under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See McCarroll v. Hunt, No. CA-01-173-3-MU (W.D.N.C. May 17, 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.
AFFIRMED.