Filed: Mar. 05, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7870 JACINTO ELROY HENDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NATHANIEL JONES, Special Agent; JASON PARKER, Assistant District Attorney; HAZEL SHERRILL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (5:08-cv-00086-GCM) Submitted: February 26, 2009 Decided: March 5, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7870 JACINTO ELROY HENDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NATHANIEL JONES, Special Agent; JASON PARKER, Assistant District Attorney; HAZEL SHERRILL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (5:08-cv-00086-GCM) Submitted: February 26, 2009 Decided: March 5, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7870 JACINTO ELROY HENDERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NATHANIEL JONES, Special Agent; JASON PARKER, Assistant District Attorney; HAZEL SHERRILL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (5:08-cv-00086-GCM) Submitted: February 26, 2009 Decided: March 5, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jacinto Elroy Henderson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jacinto Elroy Henderson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Henderson v. Jones, No. 5:08- cv-00086-GCM (W.D.N.C. Aug. 11, 2008). 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
