Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Perkins v. Creecy, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    Benjamin Walker Perkins filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Perkins appealed the denial. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning in the lower court's opinion, which accepted the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny relief. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the materials provided.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2000-05-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 00-6169

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Benjamin Walker Perkins filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Perkins appealed the denial. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning in the lower court's opinion, which accepted the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny relief. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the materials provided.

    Copyright:

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

    Perkins v. Creecy, 4th Cir. (2000)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Benjamin Walker Perkins filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials which was denied by the district court. Perkins appealed the denial. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appellate court affirmed the district court's ruling based on the reasoning in the lower court's opinion, which accepted the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny relief. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately addressed in the materials provided.

    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. 00-6169

    BENJAMIN WALKER PERKINS,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    CHARLES M. CREECY, JR.; RICK JORDAN; QUENTIN
    FUTRELL; MR. REID, #1 Kitchen Supervisor,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District
    Judge. (CA-98-968-5-BR)

    Submitted:

    May 11, 2000

    Decided:

    May 18, 2000

    Before MURNAGHAN, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Benjamin Walker Perkins, Appellant Pro Se. William Dennis Worley,
    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North
    Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Benjamin Walker Perkins appeals the district courts order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint.
    We have reviewed the record and the district courts opinion
    accepting the magistrate judges recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
    court.

    See Perkins v. Creecy, No. CA-98-968-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Jan.

    10, 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.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like