Hawkins v. Braxton
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-7801
THOMAS HAWKINS, Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
DANIEL BRAXTON, Warden, Buckingham Correctional Center,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District 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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 General , 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hawkins v. Braxton (Hawkins v. Braxton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.