Filed: Jan. 03, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7235 WILBERT DONNELL QUICK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WAKE COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY/MEDICAL; DOCTOR UMESI; DONNIE HARRISON, Sheriff, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:05-ct-00755-D) Submitted: December 21, 2006 Decided: January 3, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Aff
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7235 WILBERT DONNELL QUICK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WAKE COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY/MEDICAL; DOCTOR UMESI; DONNIE HARRISON, Sheriff, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:05-ct-00755-D) Submitted: December 21, 2006 Decided: January 3, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affi..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7235 WILBERT DONNELL QUICK, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WAKE COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY/MEDICAL; DOCTOR UMESI; DONNIE HARRISON, Sheriff, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:05-ct-00755-D) Submitted: December 21, 2006 Decided: January 3, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wilbert Donnell Quick, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wilbert Donnell Quick appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Quick v. Wake County Detention Facility, No. 5:05-CT-00755-D (E.D.N.C. Apr. 11 & June 30, 2006). 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 -
