Court Opinion

ID: 1002385
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 18:10:21.148804+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:30:09.650273
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                               No. 00-6582

THOMAS EDWARD PLUMMER,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

GEORGE HINKLE, Warden, Haynesville Correction-
al Center; W. WATERS, Correctional Officer; F.
COLEMAN, Lieutenant,

                                              Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Richmond.    Richard L. Williams, District
Judge. (CA-99-673-3)

Submitted:   August 30, 2000              Decided:   September 7, 2000

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Edward Plummer, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

     Thomas Edward Plummer, 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.   See Plummer v. Hinkle, No.

CA-99-673-3 (E.D. Va. Apr. 6, 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

                                 2