Brown v. Angelone

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6685

DEMETRIOUS ERIC BROWN, a/k/a Denrick Eric Brown, a/k/a Demmrick Eric Brown,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director; GENE M. JOHNSON, Deputy; REFUS FLEMING, Regional Director; DAVID GARRAGHTY, Chief Warden; S. J. AVENT, Administrative Assistant Warden; J. D. OATHS, Medical Administrator for the Virginia Department of Corrections; J. CAPPS, Human Rights Advocate; CHARLES ALLEN, Unit Manager; B. PHILLIPS, Medical Administrator for CMS; ELLA KLUG, Regional Administrator for CMS; BETH KENNEDY, Regional Manager for CMS; MIKE PFEIFFER, Medical Operation Manager for CMS; ANNETTE HOLMES, Medical Administrator of CMS; K. HAMLIN, Head Nurse for CMS; D. SLOAN, LPN for CMS; C. MANNING, LPN for CMS; ROY P. HARRIS, Prison Guard, Lieutenant; VINCENT M. GORE, Doctor for CMS; M. VERNON SMITH, Doctor, Health Care Director; DOCTOR SWETHER; DOCTOR SALIH; GLORIA SLOAN; ROY J. HARRISON, Lieutenant; DOCTOR SWETTER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-144-AM)

Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 5, 2002 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Demetrious Eric Brown, Appellant Pro Se. John D. McChesny, RAWLS & NCNELIS, P.C., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

PER CURIAM:

Demetrious Eric Brown appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2002)

complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Brown’s

motion to appoint counsel, and affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Brown v. Angelone, No. CA-01-144-AM (E.D. Va.,

filed Mar. 28, 2002; entered Mar. 29, 2002). 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