# Ballentine v. Virginia Parole Board

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · August 24, 2005 · 141 F. App'x 214

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1016976

## Case

- **Full name:** John Frederick BALLENTINE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD, Defendant-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 24, 2005
- **Citations:** 141 F. App'x 214
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Widener, Williams, Michael
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1016976

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6336

JOHN FREDERICK BALLENTINE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

VIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief
District Judge. (CA-04-537-3)

Submitted: August 18, 2005 Decided: August 24, 2005

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Frederick Ballentine, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

John Frederick Ballentine appeals the district court’s

order accepting a magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny relief

on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint and a subsequent order

denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. See Ballentine v.

Virginia Parole Bd., No. CA-04-537-3 (E.D. Va. Dec. 6, 2004 & Jan.

26, 2005). 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

- 2 -

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1016976. Public record. Not legal advice.