Donohue v. Hinkle

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Donohue v. Hinkle, 585 F. App'x 266 (4th Cir. 2014)

Donohue v. Hinkle

Opinion of the Court

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Donohue appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Donohue v. Hinkle, No. 7:14-cv-00138-GEC-RSB (W.D.Va. May 15, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented *267in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Reference

Full Case Name
John DONOHUE v. George HINKLE, Regional Administrator Randall C. Mathena, Warden, ROSP T. Raiford, Counselor, and current Unit Manager at ROSP L. Mullins, Institutional Hearings Officer at ROSP Ingle, C/O at ROSP
Status
Published