Filed: Nov. 23, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7034 RODNEY MCDONALD WILLIAMS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:14-hc-02200-BO) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7034 RODNEY MCDONALD WILLIAMS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:14-hc-02200-BO) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney M..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7034 RODNEY MCDONALD WILLIAMS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:14-hc-02200-BO) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney McDonald Williams, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rodney McDonald Williams appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal as frivolous. 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. DISMISSED 2
