Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Charles Smith v. Robert Lewis, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of relief to Charles Henry Smith on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It denied Smith's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented. The district court's decision was affirmed for the reasons stated in its July 19, 2013 opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-01-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-7206

    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    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of relief to Charles Henry Smith on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It denied Smith's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented. The district court's decision was affirmed for the reasons stated in its July 19, 2013 opinion.

    Copyright:

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

    Charles Smith v. Robert Lewis, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of relief to Charles Henry Smith on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error. It denied Smith's motion for appointment of counsel and dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented. The district court's decision was affirmed for the reasons stated in its July 19, 2013 opinion.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 13-7206

    CHARLES H. SMITH,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    ROBERT C. LEWIS; ALVIN W. KELLER, JR.; FAYE DANIELS,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    N.C. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
    Defendant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    Louise W. Flanagan,
    District Judge. (5:12-ct-03013-FL)

    Submitted:

    December 27, 2013

    Decided:

    January 10, 2014

    Before KING, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Charles H. Smith, Appellant Pro Se.


    Kimberly D. Grande, NORTH
    CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Charles Henry Smith appeals the district courts order
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint.
    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    We

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    court.
    2013).
    dispense

    Smith v. Lewis, No. 5:12-ct-03013-FL (E.D.N.C. July 19,


    We

    deny

    with

    contentions

    are

    the

    oral

    motion
    argument

    adequately

    for

    appointment

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    of

    counsel

    and

    facts

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like