Filed: Jan. 10, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7206 CHARLES H. SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ROBERT C. LEWIS; ALVIN W. KELLER, JR.; FAYE DANIELS, Defendants - Appellees, and N.C. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:12-ct-03013-FL) Submitted: December 27, 2013 Decided: January 10, 2014 Before KING, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Jud
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7206 CHARLES H. SMITH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ROBERT C. LEWIS; ALVIN W. KELLER, JR.; FAYE DANIELS, Defendants - Appellees, and N.C. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:12-ct-03013-FL) Submitted: December 27, 2013 Decided: January 10, 2014 Before KING, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judg..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7206
CHARLES H. SMITH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ROBERT C. LEWIS; ALVIN W. KELLER, JR.; FAYE DANIELS,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Defendant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:12-ct-03013-FL)
Submitted: December 27, 2013 Decided: January 10, 2014
Before KING, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles H. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly D. Grande, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles Henry Smith 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. Smith v. Lewis, No. 5:12-ct-03013-FL (E.D.N.C. July 19,
2013). We deny the motion for appointment of counsel and
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2