Bacon v. Mathena

610 F. App'x 317
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 28, 2015
DocketNo. 15-6680
StatusPublished

This text of 610 F. App'x 317 (Bacon v. Mathena) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bacon v. Mathena, 610 F. App'x 317 (4th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Adrian Nathaniel Bacon appeals the district court’s order dismissing, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2012), his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) suit. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Bacon’s informal brief does not challenge the district court’s conclusion [318]*318that his suit must be dismissed as malicious, Bacon has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we deny Bacon’s motion to appoint counsel and dismiss the district court’s judgment. 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.

DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Screening
28 U.S.C. § 1915A

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
610 F. App'x 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bacon-v-mathena-ca4-2015.