Filed: Oct. 01, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1745 LAUNEIL SANDERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA; NORTH CAROLINA, State of, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:10-cv-00199-FDW-DCK) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 1, 2010 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per c
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1745 LAUNEIL SANDERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA; NORTH CAROLINA, State of, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:10-cv-00199-FDW-DCK) Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 1, 2010 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per cu..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1745
LAUNEIL SANDERS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA; NORTH CAROLINA, State of,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,
District Judge. (3:10-cv-00199-FDW-DCK)
Submitted: September 28, 2010 Decided: October 1, 2010
Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Launeil Sanders, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Launeil Sanders appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find
that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the
appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Sanders v.
Gaston County, No. 3:10-cv-00199-FDW-DCK (W.D.N.C. June 24,
2010). 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