Filed: May 15, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7970 PAMELA J. ANDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA HUFFMAN, Warden, Fluvanna Correctional Center for Women, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-732-7) Submitted: April 24, 2002 Decided: May 15, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7970 PAMELA J. ANDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA HUFFMAN, Warden, Fluvanna Correctional Center for Women, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-732-7) Submitted: April 24, 2002 Decided: May 15, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam o..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7970 PAMELA J. ANDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PATRICIA HUFFMAN, Warden, Fluvanna Correctional Center for Women, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-732-7) Submitted: April 24, 2002 Decided: May 15, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pamela J. Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Pamela J. Anderson, a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on her 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 2001). 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 Anderson v. Huffman, No. CA-01-732-7 (W.D. Va. Nov. 8, 2001). 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
