Davis v. Smith

Fourth Circuit

Davis v. Smith

123 F. App'x 132

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided March 17, 2005·No. 04-7631·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Sherman 0. Davis appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) and denying his motion for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Davis v. Smith, No. CA-03-425-7 (W.D.Va. Oct. 31, 2003; filed Sept. 13, 2004, entered Sept. 15, 2004). 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.

Sherman 0. Davis appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) and denying his motion for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Davis v. Smith, No. CA-03-425-7 (W.D.Va. Oct. 31, 2003; filed Sept. 13, 2004, entered Sept. 15, 2004). 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

Davis v. Smith, 123 F. App'x 132 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

123 F. App'x 132 (Davis v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related