Court Opinion

ID: 2964174
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:21:43.312986+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:10:53.164212
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          June 24, 1996
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 95-2110

                               WALTER R. SIMPSON, JR.,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                             GEORGE A. VOSE, JR., ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

                    [Hon. Ronald R. Lagueux, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                 Selya, Cyr and Lynch,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Walter R. Simpson, Jr. on brief pro se.
            ______________________
            Michael B.  Grant, Senior Legal  Counsel, Rhode Island  Department
            _________________
        of Corrections, on brief for appellees.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.   We  affirm the judgment  substantially for
                 __________

            the reasons recited  in the  magistrate-judge's report  dated

            August  11, 1995.   See also  Figueroa v. Vose,  81 F.3d 147,
                                ________  ________    ____

            1996  WL  136891  (1st   Cir.  1996)  (per  curiam)  (table).

            Inasmuch  as plaintiff  did not incur  any loss  of good-time

            credits,  we voice no opinion  as to whether  such a sanction

            might give rise to a liberty interest under Sandin v. Conner,
                                                        ______    ______

            115 S. Ct. 2293 (1995).  

                 Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                 ____________________________

                                         -2-