Bartlett v. Robeson

489 F. App'x 743
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 27, 2012
DocketNo. 12-7156
StatusPublished

This text of 489 F. App'x 743 (Bartlett v. Robeson) 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
Bartlett v. Robeson, 489 F. App'x 743 (4th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Ricky Bartlett appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 [744]*744U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and his numerous motions for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bartlett v. Robeson, No. 5:11-ct-03008-BO, 2012 WL 2237003 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 21 & June 15, 2012). 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.

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

Related

§ 1983
744 U.S.C. § 1983
§ 1983
44 U.S.C. § 1983

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
489 F. App'x 743, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bartlett-v-robeson-ca4-2012.