Court Opinion

ID: 998959
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:18:39.75378+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:37.538886
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 98-7801

THOMAS HAWKINS,

                                            Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

DANIEL BRAXTON, Warden, Buckingham Correction-
al Center,

                                              Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.
(CA-98-219)

Submitted:   April 13, 1999                 Decided:   June 15, 1999

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jonathan Stanley David, MORRISSEY, HERSHNER & JACOBS, Richmond,
Virginia, for Appellant. William W. Muse, Assistant Attorney Gen-
eral, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Thomas Hawkins appeals from the portion of the district

court’s order finding that the appropriate statute under which to

review his action was 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998), rather

than 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998).   We find that the

district court did not err by analyzing the action under § 1983.

See Roller v. Cavanaugh, 984 F.2d 120, 122 (4th Cir. 1993).    Con-

sequently, we affirm.   We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma-

terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

                                                           AFFIRMED

                                 2