Case Name: Jimmy BOWMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bishop KNOTT, Jr., individually and in his official capacity as Clerk of Prince George County Circuit Court, Defendant-Appellee, and Helen H. Fahey, individually as Chairperson of the Virginia Parole Board; Darnley R. Hodge, individually as the Superintendent of the Riverside Regional Jail, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-01-23
Citations: 267 F. App'x 214
Docket Number: No. 07-7100
Parties: Jimmy BOWMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bishop KNOTT, Jr., individually and in his official capacity as Clerk of Prince George County Circuit Court, Defendant-Appellee, and Helen H. Fahey, individually as Chairperson of the Virginia Parole Board; Darnley R. Hodge, individually as the Superintendent of the Riverside Regional Jail, Defendants.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 267
Pages: 214–215

Head Matter:
Jimmy BOWMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bishop KNOTT, Jr., individually and in his official capacity as Clerk of Prince George County Circuit Court, Defendant-Appellee, and Helen H. Fahey, individually as Chairperson of the Virginia Parole Board; Darnley R. Hodge, individually as the Superintendent of the Riverside Regional Jail, Defendants.
No. 07-7100.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 17, 2008.
Decided: Jan. 23, 2008.
Jimmy Bowman, Appellant Pro Se.
Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jimmy Bowman appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and conclude that the Appellee was entitled to derivative absolute judicial immunity. McCray v. Maryland, 456 F.2d 1, 5 (4th Cir.1972). Accordingly, we affirm. 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.