UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

DARRELL W. SAMUEL,
Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON, President of
the United States of America;
GEORGE BUSH, former President of
the USA; RONALD REAGAN, former
President of the USA; OLIVER L.
NORTH, former member of the
Marine Corps; JANET RENO,
Attorney General of the United
States; RICHARD THORNBURGH,
former Attorney General of the
                                                   No. 99-7681
United States; EDWIN A. MEESE, III,
former Attorney General of the
United States; WILLIAM FRENCH
SMITH, sued as the Estate of
William French Smith, former
Attorney General; GEORGE J. TENET,
Director of CIA; JOHN DEUTCH,
former Director of CIA; ROBERT
GATES, former Director of CIA;
WILLIAM CASEY, sued as the Estate
of William Casey, former Director
of CIA,
Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia.
Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
(CA-99-2950)
Submitted: May 31, 2000

Decided: June 20, 2000

Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges,
and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Darrell W. Samuel, Appellant Pro Se. Robert F. Daley, Jr., Assistant
United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Darrell W. Samuel appeals the district court's dismissal of his
action under the civil remedies provision of the Racketeering Influ-
enced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C.A. § 1964(c)
(West Supp. 2000). In his complaint, Samuel sought relief against
President Clinton and past presidents Bush and Reagan; Oliver North;
Janet Reno and three past Attorneys General; and present and past
directors of the Central Intelligence Agency. Seeking to proceed in a
class action, Samuel asserted that the defendants conspired to allow
the massive importation and distribution of cocaine to fund the Nica-
raguan Contras. He claimed that this conspiracy resulted in a wave of
cocaine addicts, drug dealers, and drug-related crime, a high rate of
imprisonment in the class of minorities he sought to represent, and

                    2
other economic impact. Samuel requested two billion dollars in dam-
ages for the class, trebled pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1964(c).

A pro se prisoner cannot represent others in a class action. Oxen-
dine v. Williams, 509 F.2d 1405, 1407 (4th Cir. 1975). In addition,
summary dismissal was appropriate for Samuel's complaint as there
is no direct, causal connection between the activity that Samuel attri-
butes to defendants and any injury to him. Holmes v. Securities Inves-
tor Protection Corp., 503 U.S. 258, 268-69 (1992) (holding proximate
causation of injury by RICO violation necessary to support civil
claim). Therefore, we affirm the district court's summary dismissal of
Samuel's complaint, as well as the sanctions imposed under 28
U.S.C.A. § 1932 (West Supp. 2000). 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
