Case ID: f-appx_11/html/0208-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Charles E. HINTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Amy M. SIFFORD; Richard W. Jacobsen, Jr.; Patrick M. Martin; Ramona Masterton, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 00-7788.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 27, 2001.
    Decided May 3, 2001.
    Charles E. Hinton, pro se.
    Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM.

Charles E. Hinton appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Hinton v. Sifford, No. CA-00-541-1-3-MU (W.D.N.C. Nov. 15, 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.