# Brown v. Hodges

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · December 6, 2000

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1003104

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 6, 2000
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1003104

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-7123

CURTIS J. BROWN, SR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JIM HODGES, Governor,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(CA-00-1804-3-18AJ)

Submitted: November 30, 2000 Decided: December 6, 2000

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Curtis J. Brown, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Curtis J. Brown, Sr., a South Carolina 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 opin-

ion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find that

this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on

the reasoning of the district court. See Brown v. Hodges, No. CA-

00-1804-3-18AJ (D.S.C. July 25, 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

*
Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
July 21, 2000, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on July 25, 2000. Pursuant to Rules 58
and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date
that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the
effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v.
Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1003104. Public record. Not legal advice.