Filed: Apr. 22, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6189 MONTE DECARLOS WINSTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant – Appellee, and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; K. ANDERSON, DHD acting on behalf of Federal Bureau of Prisons, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:11-cv-00812-REP) Submitted: April 17, 2014 Decided: April 22, 2014 Before WILK
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6189 MONTE DECARLOS WINSTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant – Appellee, and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; K. ANDERSON, DHD acting on behalf of Federal Bureau of Prisons, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:11-cv-00812-REP) Submitted: April 17, 2014 Decided: April 22, 2014 Before WILKI..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6189
MONTE DECARLOS WINSTON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; K. ANDERSON, DHD acting on behalf
of Federal Bureau of Prisons,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior
District Judge. (3:11-cv-00812-REP)
Submitted: April 17, 2014 Decided: April 22, 2014
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Monte Decarlos Winston, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Holland
Hambrick, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Monte Decarlos Winston appeals the district court’s
orders granting summary judgment to the United States and
dismissing Winston’s complaint filed under the Federal Tort
Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680 (2012), and denying Winston’s
Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 motion for relief from judgment. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See
Winston v. United States, No. 3:11-cv-00812-REP (E.D. Va. Sept.
10, 2013 & Jan. 27, 2014). We 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
3