Coleman v. 16th Circuit Court

553 F. App'x 337
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 4, 2014·No. No. 13-7282·Published

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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

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

553 F. App'x 337 (Coleman v. 16th Circuit Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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