Copley v. Beck

Fourth Circuit

Copley v. Beck

182 F. App'x 276

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 31, 2006·No. No. 06-6206·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Billy R. Copley appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accoi’dingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Copley v. Beck, No. 5:04-ct-00876-FL (E.D.N.C. Jan. 26, 2006). We deny Copley’s motion to appoint counsel. 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

PER CURIAM:

Billy R. Copley appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accoi’dingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Copley v. Beck, No. 5:04-ct-00876-FL (E.D.N.C. Jan. 26, 2006). We deny Copley’s motion to appoint counsel. 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.

Copley v. Beck, 182 F. App'x 276 (4th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

182 F. App'x 276 (Copley v. Beck) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related