Filed: Dec. 07, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7138 DEWAYNE LEE ANTHONY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOHN HARVEY SMITH, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (5:10-cv-00033-GCM) Submitted: November 30, 2010 Decided: December 7, 2010 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dewayne Lee Antho
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7138 DEWAYNE LEE ANTHONY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JOHN HARVEY SMITH, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (5:10-cv-00033-GCM) Submitted: November 30, 2010 Decided: December 7, 2010 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dewayne Lee Anthon..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7138
DEWAYNE LEE ANTHONY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
JOHN HARVEY SMITH,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen,
Senior District Judge. (5:10-cv-00033-GCM)
Submitted: November 30, 2010 Decided: December 7, 2010
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dewayne Lee Anthony, Appellant Pro Se. Oliver Gray Wheeler,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dewayne Lee Anthony appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Anthony v. Smith, No. 5:10-cv-00033-GCM (W.D.N.C.
Aug. 2, 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.
AFFIRMED
2