Hendricks v. Powhatan Corr. Center Warden/Superintendent

Fourth Circuit

Hendricks v. Powhatan Corr. Center Warden/Superintendent

412 F. App'x 572

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 23, 2011·No. No. 10-7522·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Terry Hendricks appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hendricks v. Powhatan Corr. Ctr., No. 2:10-cv-00445-RBS-FBS (E.D.Va. Oct. 19, 2010). 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.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Terry Hendricks appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hendricks v. Powhatan Corr. Ctr., No. 2:10-cv-00445-RBS-FBS (E.D.Va. Oct. 19, 2010). 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.

AFFIRMED.

Hendricks v. Powhatan Corr. Center Warden/Superintendent, 412 F. App'x 572 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

412 F. App'x 572 (Hendricks v. Powhatan Corr. Center Warden/Superintendent) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related