Pearce v. North Carolina Dept. of Corrections, 92-6394

• Citation: 972 F.2d 341
• Decision Date: 27 May 1992
• Docket Number: No. 92-6394,92-6394
• Parties: NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Jerry Douglas PEARCE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. N.C. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS; Aaron J. Johnson, Secretary of Prisons; Wayne Spears, Superintendent, Hoke Correctional Center; John Williams, Assistant Superintendent of Programs; Lewis Ferguson, Central Unit Manager; North Carolina Parole Commission, Defendants-Appellees. . Submitted:
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)

Page 341

972 F.2d 341

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Jerry Douglas PEARCE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. N.C. DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS; Aaron J. Johnson, Secretary of

Prisons; Wayne Spears, Superintendent, Hoke Correctional

Center; John Williams, Assistant Superintendent of

Programs; Lewis Ferguson, Central Unit Manager; North

Carolina Parole Commission, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 92-6394.

United States Court of Appeals,

Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 27, 1992

Decided: July 29, 1992

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CA-90-260-CRT-BO)

Jerry Douglas Pearce, Appellant Pro Se.

LaVee Hamer Jackson, Office of The Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

E.D.N.C.

Affirmed.

Before PHILLIPS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Jerry Douglas Pearce appeals from the district court's order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Pearce v. North Carolina Dep't of Corrections, No. CA-90-260-CRT-BO (E.D.N.C. Mar. 9, 1992). 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