Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 12 views

    Bartlett v. NC Dept of Correction, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr. on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the North Carolina Department of Correction and several officials. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding 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

    You might also like

    Bartlett v. NC Dept of Correction, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    12 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr. on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the North Carolina Department of Correction and several officials. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-08-04 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6462

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr. on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the North Carolina Department of Correction and several officials. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding 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
    12 views2 pages

    Bartlett v. NC Dept of Correction, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr. on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the North Carolina Department of Correction and several officials. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, finding 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. 05-6462

    ROBERT ANDREW BARTLETT, SR.,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION;
    THEODIS BECK; BOYD BENNETT; ROBY C. LEE; TONY
    SANDERS,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    Terrence W. Boyle,
    District Judge. (CA-04-576-5-BO)

    Submitted:

    July 27, 2005

    Decided:

    August 4, 2005

    Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Robert Andrew Bartlett, Sr., appeals the district courts
    order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.
    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    We

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    court.

    See Bartlett v. North Carolina Dept of Corr., No. CA-04-

    576-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Mar. 4, 2005).

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like