Court Opinion

ID: 1023026
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 23:31:48.631289+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:37:08.445118
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
 

  Daniel Peterson 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 for the rea
   
   *364
   
  sons stated by the district court.
  
   Peterson v. James,
  
  No. 5:05-ct-00501-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 15, 2007). 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.