Court Opinion

ID: 1003431
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 18:26:19.883061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:36.741697
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 00-7364

RICKY LEE JONES,

                                              Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

ALTON BASKERVILLE, Warden; M. WILLIAMS, Lieu-
tenant, M Building; EARL R. BARKSDALE, Major;
JAMES PHELPHS, Sergeant, M Building; M. SEAY,
Institutional Ombudsman; D. W. BARNES, Medical
Doctor; W. P. ROGERS, Regional Director; P.
GRANT, Safety Officer,

                                             Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (CA-00-1368-A)

Submitted:   January 18, 2001             Decided:   January 25, 2001

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ricky Lee Jones, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Ricky Lee Jones, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district

court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.

2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2000).    We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find

that this appeal is frivolous.   Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal

on the reasoning of the district court.   Jones v. Baskerville, No.

CA-00-1368-A (E.D. Va. Sept. 12, 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.

                                                         DISMISSED

     *
       Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
September 11, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on September 12, 2000. Pursuant to
Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is
the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we
take as the effective date of the district court’s decision.
Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

                                 2