Filed: Jul. 31, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6377 ORLANDO J. WESLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LT. OAKES; LT. LYLES; C/O KELLY; SGT. DORSEY; SGT. GILMORE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-ct-03128-D) Submitted: July 29, 2014 Decided: July 31, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6377 ORLANDO J. WESLEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LT. OAKES; LT. LYLES; C/O KELLY; SGT. DORSEY; SGT. GILMORE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-ct-03128-D) Submitted: July 29, 2014 Decided: July 31, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6377
ORLANDO J. WESLEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LT. OAKES; LT. LYLES; C/O KELLY; SGT. DORSEY; SGT. GILMORE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever, III,
Chief District Judge. (5:12-ct-03128-D)
Submitted: July 29, 2014 Decided: July 31, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Orlando J. Wesley, Appellant Pro Se. Jodi Harrison, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Orlando J. Wesley appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Wesley v. Oakes, No. 5:12-ct-03128-D (E.D.N.C. Feb. 25,
2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2