Curtis Austin v. Larry Norris

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 99-3233 ___________

Curtis Nathaniel Austin, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas * Eastern District of Arkansas. Department of Correction; Rick * Toney, Warden,Varner Unit, * [UNPUBLISHED] Arkansas Department of Correction, * * Appellees. * ___________

Submitted: November 24, 1999 Filed: December 6, 1999 ___________

Before BOWMAN, FAGG, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

Curtis Nathaniel Austin, an Arkansas inmate, appeals from the district court’s1 order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action following an evidentiary hearing. Austin

1 The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Jerry W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. alleged that defendants’ hair-length policy requiring him to cut his hair violated his First Amendment rights, the Equal Protection Clause, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb-20000bb-4. He also claimed that a prior settlement agreement precluded application of the policy to him. After careful review of the record and the parties’ submissions on appeal, we conclude that the district court correctly dismissed Austin’s action as his claims fail, see Montano v. Hedgepeth, 120 F.3d 844, 848 n.8 (8th Cir. 1997) (RFRA); United States v. Bell, 86 F.3d 820, 823 (8th Cir.) (equal protection), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 955 (1996); Campbell v. Purkett, 957 F.2d 535, 536-37 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (First Amendment); and the settlement agreement has been terminated, see Ronnie Briggs v. James Mabry, No. 99-1396, slip op. (8th Cir.).

Accordingly, we affirm without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-