Filed: Jul. 30, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6613 ALPHONZO J. MILLER, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. MR. SHARP, Dentist, Dr., Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:09-cv-00050-MSD-TEM) Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 30, 2009 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alphonzo
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6613 ALPHONZO J. MILLER, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. MR. SHARP, Dentist, Dr., Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:09-cv-00050-MSD-TEM) Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 30, 2009 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alphonzo ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6613 ALPHONZO J. MILLER, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. MR. SHARP, Dentist, Dr., Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District Judge. (2:09-cv-00050-MSD-TEM) Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 30, 2009 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alphonzo J. Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alphonzo J. Miller appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Miller v. Sharp, No. 2:09-cv-00050-MSD-TEM (E.D. Va. Mar. 6, 2009). 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
