Case Name: Billy LAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary of Correction; James B. Bennett, Director of Prisons; Grady J. Haynes, Superintendent of Warren Correctional; Hattie B. Pimpong, Chief Disciplinary Hearing Officer; Robert Terry, Jr., Hearing Officer; Lt. Norwood; J.R. James, Lieutenant; T. Brown, Officer; D. Harding, Officer; A. Patterson, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-06-27
Citations: 38 F. App'x 959
Docket Number: No. 02-6679
Parties: Billy LAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary of Correction; James B. Bennett, Director of Prisons; Grady J. Haynes, Superintendent of Warren Correctional; Hattie B. Pimpong, Chief Disciplinary Hearing Officer; Robert Terry, Jr., Hearing Officer; Lt. Norwood; J.R. James, Lieutenant; T. Brown, Officer; D. Harding, Officer; A. Patterson, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 38
Pages: 959–960

Head Matter:
Billy LAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary of Correction; James B. Bennett, Director of Prisons; Grady J. Haynes, Superintendent of Warren Correctional; Hattie B. Pimpong, Chief Disciplinary Hearing Officer; Robert Terry, Jr., Hearing Officer; Lt. Norwood; J.R. James, Lieutenant; T. Brown, Officer; D. Harding, Officer; A. Patterson, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 02-6679.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 20, 2002.
Decided June 27, 2002.
Billy Land, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Billy Land, a Virginia prisoner, appeals the district court's order denying his self-styled "motion for hearing." We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Land claims the district court must conduct a hearing to determine the constitutionality of a refundable ten dollar administrative fee imposed upon inmates who file internal grievances against prison officials. We have already rejected Land's claim in a prior opinion. See Land v. Beck, No. 01-7386, 2001 WL 1661466, 22 Fed.Appx. 327 (4th Cir. Dec. 28, 2001). Therefore, Land's claim is barred under principles of res judicata. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.