Case Name: Keith Lamonte HILL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Linda CURTIS, Commonwealth Attorney; Christopher Hutton; B.J. Roberts, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-02-07
Citations: 3 F. App'x 59
Docket Number: No. 00-7256
Parties: Keith Lamonte HILL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Linda CURTIS, Commonwealth Attorney; Christopher Hutton; B.J. Roberts, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 3
Pages: 59–59

Head Matter:
Keith Lamonte HILL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Linda CURTIS, Commonwealth Attorney; Christopher Hutton; B.J. Roberts, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 00-7256.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 19, 2001.
Decided Feb. 7, 2001.
Keith Lamonte Hill, pro se.
Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Keith Lamonte Hill 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 and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Hill v. Curtis, No. CA-99-817 (E.D.Va. Aug. 24, 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.