Coleman v. 16th Circuit Court

553 F. App'x 337
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 4, 2014
DocketNo. 13-7282
StatusPublished

This text of 553 F. App'x 337 (Coleman v. 16th Circuit Court) 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
Coleman v. 16th Circuit Court, 553 F. App'x 337 (4th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William T. Coleman appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We conclude, as did magistrate judge and the district court, that Coleman’s Section 1983 claims are barred by the Supreme Court’s decision in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.

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

Related

Heck v. Humphrey
512 U.S. 477 (Supreme Court, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
553 F. App'x 337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-16th-circuit-court-ca4-2014.