Ragland v. Powell ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6575
OMORO RAGLAND,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
H. R. POWELL; W. W. PIXLEY; W. F. SEAL; W.
THORNE; R. M. HEDGEPETH; LIEUTENANT BARNES;
LIEUTENANT SMITH; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER BOONE;
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER PRYOR; MS. TANN; RONALD
J. ANGELONE; GENE JOHNSON; R. FLEMING; J. LEE;
D. HAMMOND; R. A. YOUNG; L. W. JARVIS; F.
LOCKHART; K. A. POLINSKY; V. J. BANDY; GERALD
K. WASHINGTON; B. BOOKER; LIEUTENANT EDMONDS;
MS. HARRISON; L. W. HUFFMAN; J. BOONE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
Judge. (7:02-cv-00786-jct)
Submitted: July 25, 2006 Decided: August 2, 2006
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Omoro Ragland, Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant
Attorney General, Joel Christopher Hoppe, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Omoro Ragland appeals from the district court’s order
granting summary judgment to the Defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983(2000) action challenging, among other things, the validity and
enforcement of the prison’s grooming policy. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. Ragland v. Powell, No.
7:02-cv-00786-jct (W.D. Va. filed Mar. 14 & entered Mar. 15, 2006).
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
- 3 -