Court Opinion

ID: 988899
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 22:59:17.513686+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:34:39.024194
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 95-7354

ROGER D. YOUNG,

                                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

KEITH HESTER; W. V. RITCHIE,

                                            Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District
Judge. (CA-93-717-CT-5-F)

Submitted:   March 21, 1996                 Decided:   April 2, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roger D. Young, Appellant Pro Se. Mark J. Pletzke, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. 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. Young v. Hester, No. CA-93-717-CT-5-F (E.D.N.C. Aug. 3,
1995). 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

                                2