Hood v. Beck | Court Opinion

Opinions

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6935

ROBERT LEE HOOD,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

THEODIS BECK; WINIFRED H. DILLON; JAMES L. GRIFFIN; MICHAEL S. HAMDEN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-312-5-BO)

Submitted: August 26, 2004 Decided: September 3, 2004

Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Lee Hood, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Robert Lee Hood appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as

frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Hood v. Beck, No. CA-04-

312-5-BO (E.D.N.C. May 17, 2004). 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 -