Case Name: Robert Lee HOOD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK; Winifred H. Dillon; James L. Griffin; Michael S. Hamden, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-09-03
Citations: 108 F. App'x 785
Docket Number: No. 04-6935
Parties: Robert Lee HOOD, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Theodis BECK; Winifred H. Dillon; James L. Griffin; Michael S. Hamden, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 108
Pages: 785–785

Head Matter:
Robert Lee HOOD, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Theodis BECK; Winifred H. Dillon; James L. Griffin; Michael S. Hamden, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 04-6935.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 26, 2004.
Decided Sept. 3, 2004.
Robert Lee Hood, Appellant pro se.
Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Robert Lee Hood appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Hood v. Beck, No. CA-04-312-5-BO (E.D.N.C. May 17, 2004). 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