Case ID: f-appx_120/html/0940-01.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

Tony A. HAWKINS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Sidney HARKLEROAD, Respondent—Appellee, and Dean R. Walker, Respondent.
    No. 04-6894.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 24, 2004.
    Decided Jan. 3, 2005.
    Tony A. Hawkins, Appellant pro se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Tony A. Hawkins appeals the district court’s order denying his motion he labeled as filed under Rule 61 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Hawkins v. Walker, No. CA-01-161-5-2MU (W.D.N.C. May 10, 2004). We grant Hawkins’ motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 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 
      
       To the extent that Hawkins’ motion could have been construed as a motion under Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(b), we note he did not satisfy the criteria for relief under that rule. Further, to the extent Hawkins' appeal could be construed as a motion seeking authorization under 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (2000) to Me a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition, Hawkins failed to demonstrate he is entitled to such authorization.