Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

McLean v. Philmon, 97-6527 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-6527 Visitors: 42
Filed: Aug. 21, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6527 MICHAEL MCLEAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus OFFICER PHILMON; Q. PULLEN, Officer; B. HARRIS, Officer; JAMES BRODY, Officer; OFFICER WIGGINS; OFFICER PITTMAN; OFFICER ROOKS; JAMES GILMORE, Inmate; KEITH ZEBULON, Inmate; BOBBIE FORTHOUSE, Inmate; JAMES NEWKIRK, Inmate; INMATE RAMSUR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Bri
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-6527 MICHAEL MCLEAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus OFFICER PHILMON; Q. PULLEN, Officer; B. HARRIS, Officer; JAMES BRODY, Officer; OFFICER WIGGINS; OFFICER PITTMAN; OFFICER ROOKS; JAMES GILMORE, Inmate; KEITH ZEBULON, Inmate; BOBBIE FORTHOUSE, Inmate; JAMES NEWKIRK, Inmate; INMATE RAMSUR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-97-108-5-BR) Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 21, 1997 Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael McLean, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A (West Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. According- ly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. McLean v. Philmon, No. CA-97-108-5-BR (E.D.N.C. Apr. 7, 1997). The motion for appointment of counsel is denied. 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. DISMISSED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer