Case Name: Albert MILLER, III, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Patricia BAILEY; David M. Hinds; Joseph E. Swanton; Hashemee Sayd, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-04-18
Citations: 12 F. App'x 125
Docket Number: No. 01-6140
Parties: Albert MILLER, III, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Patricia BAILEY; David M. Hinds; Joseph E. Swanton; Hashemee Sayd, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 12
Pages: 125–126

Head Matter:
Albert MILLER, III, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Patricia BAILEY; David M. Hinds; Joseph E. Swanton; Hashemee Sayd, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 01-6140.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 12, 2001.
Decided April 18, 2001.
Albert Miller, III, pro se. Burén Riley Shields, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Kari Russwurm Johnson, Cran-fill, Sumner & Hartzog, L.L.P., Raleigh, NC, for appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Albert Miller, III, appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Miller v. Bailey, No. CA-00-172-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 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.