Filed: Apr. 07, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-30475 Summary Calendar CARL BLAKE RILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus EDDIE CAMESE; AUDREY AGUSTUS, incorrectly identified as “Audrie Agustus”; ORBIN TINSON, incorrectly identified as “Orbin Tinsen,” Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 94-CV-3679 - - - - - - - - - - March 28, 1997 Before JONES, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 96-30475 Summary Calendar CARL BLAKE RILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus EDDIE CAMESE; AUDREY AGUSTUS, incorrectly identified as “Audrie Agustus”; ORBIN TINSON, incorrectly identified as “Orbin Tinsen,” Defendants-Appellees. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 94-CV-3679 - - - - - - - - - - March 28, 1997 Before JONES, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER C..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-30475
Summary Calendar
CARL BLAKE RILEY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
EDDIE CAMESE; AUDREY AGUSTUS, incorrectly identified as “Audrie
Agustus”; ORBIN TINSON, incorrectly identified as “Orbin Tinsen,”
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 94-CV-3679
- - - - - - - - - -
March 28, 1997
Before JONES, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Carl Riley, Louisiana prisoner #262968, appeals from the
district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint brought
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Riley contends that the district
court erred by dismissing his complaint as frivolous. We have
reviewed the record and the district court’s order and affirm the
dismissal of Riley’s complaint for essentially the reasons
adopted by the district court. See Riley v. Camese, No. 94-3679
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 96-30475
- 2 -
(E.D. La. Apr. 8, 1996). Riley’s motion for the appointment of
counsel is DENIED.
AFFIRMED.