UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7761

MAURICE CEPHAS; CHARLES A. ANDERSON, Plaintiffs - Appellants, and GARLAND LAWSON; WILLIE S. PETTAWAY; NORMAN MORRISON; DAVID A. GARDNER; PAUBLO B. PEREZ; EDWARD NELSON DAVIS, JR., Plaintiffs, versus MICHELLE MITCHELL, Sheriff; JAMES DISMUKE; J.

STUBBLEFIELD, Defendants - Appellees.

No. 95-7862

PAUBLO B. PEREZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, and MAURICE CEPHAS; CHARLES A. ANDERSON; GARLAND LAWSON; WILLIE S. PETTAWAY; NORMAN MORRISON; DAVID A. GARDNER; EDWARD NELSON DAVIS, JR., Plaintiffs, versus

MICHELLE MITCHELL, Sheriff; JAMES DISMUKE; J.

STUBBLEFIELD, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-95-564) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: April 25, 1996

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Maurice Cephas, Charles A. Anderson, Paublo B. Perez, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellants appeals from the district court's order denying relief on their 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. Cephas v. Mitchell and Perez v. Mitchell, No. CA-95-564 (E.D. Va. Oct. 19, 1995). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED