Dixon v. Francis

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 30, 2002
• Docket: 02-6345
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6345

DAVID LAWRENCE DIXON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

DARREN R. FRANCIS, individually and in his official capacity as a law enforcement official of the West Virginia State Police Crime Laboratory; THOMAS KIRK, individually and in his official capacity as the West Virginia State Police Superintendent; KENNETH W. BLAKE, individually and in his official capacity as Director of the State Police Criminal Identification Bureau; TED SMITH, individually and in his official capacity as the Serology Division Supervisor; BRIAN K. COCHRAN, individually and in his official capacity as a law enforcement official of the West Virginia State Police; WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY; WEST VIRGINIA BOARD OF RISK MANAGEMENT,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-00-939-5)

Submitted: April 18, 2002 Decided: April 30, 2002 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Lawrence Dixon, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Patrick Houdyschell, WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

PER CURIAM:

David Lawrence Dixon appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001)

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

opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Dixon v. Francis, No. CA-00-939-5 (S.D.W. Va.

Feb. 14, 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