Filed: Oct. 21, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7011 JOHN GRIMES WELLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TOMMY A. COLEMAN, Officer; JIMMY BROWN, Cap- tain; JOHN BAKER, Sheriff, 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-97-416-5-BR) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 21, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublis
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7011 JOHN GRIMES WELLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TOMMY A. COLEMAN, Officer; JIMMY BROWN, Cap- tain; JOHN BAKER, Sheriff, 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-97-416-5-BR) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 21, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublish..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7011 JOHN GRIMES WELLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus TOMMY A. COLEMAN, Officer; JIMMY BROWN, Cap- tain; JOHN BAKER, Sheriff, 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-97-416-5-BR) Submitted: September 25, 1997 Decided: October 21, 1997 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Grimes Wells, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant, a North Carolina inmate, appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) com- plaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2) (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Wells v. Coleman, No. CA- 97-416-5-BR (E.D.N.C. July 1, 1997). 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 deci- sional process. DISMISSED 2
