Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Siler v. Bell, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Anthony Payne Siler under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various prison officials. The district court denied relief to Siler. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in Siler v. Bell, No. CA-02-534-5 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 8, 2003). The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-07-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7492

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Anthony Payne Siler under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various prison officials. The district court denied relief to Siler. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in Siler v. Bell, No. CA-02-534-5 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 8, 2003). The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    3 views2 pages

    Siler v. Bell, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case brought by Anthony Payne Siler under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against various prison officials. The district court denied relief to Siler. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, so they affirmed the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in Siler v. Bell, No. CA-02-534-5 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 8, 2003). The appellate court dispensed with oral arguments as the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-7492

    ANTHONY PAYNE SILER,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    MICHAEL W. BELL; R. H. FUTRELL; R. WHITE; T.
    L. UNDERWOOD; SARGEANT JOHNSON; SARGEANT
    SMITH;
    CORRECTIONAL
    OFFICER
    BARRETT;
    CORRECTIONAL OFFICER STALLINGS; R. STRICKLAND;
    HATTIE B. PIMPONG,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-02-534-5)

    Submitted:

    June 23, 2004

    Decided:

    July 14, 2004

    Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Anthony Payne Siler, Appellant Pro Se. James Philip Allen, NORTH
    CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Anthony Payne Siler appeals the district courts order
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.
    reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

    We have

    Accordingly, we

    affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

    See Siler v.

    Bell, No. CA-02-534-5 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 8, 2003).

    We dispense with

    oral

    contentions

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    legal

    are

    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument


    would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 2 -

    You might also like