Robert Lattimore v. Michael Garrett
This text of 610 F. App'x 252 (Robert Lattimore v. Michael Garrett) 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.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Robert Miller Lattimore appeals the district court’s order denying relief in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Following a bench trial, this court may reverse a district court’s factual findings only if they are clearly erroneous. Roanoke Cement Co. v. Falk Corp., 413 F.3d 431, 433 (4th Cir.2005). “[W]hen a district court’s factual finding in a bench trial is based upon assessments of witness credibility, such finding is deserving of the highest degree of appellate deference.” Evergreen Int’l, S.A. v. Norfolk Dredging Co., 531 F.3d 302, 308 (4th Cir.2008) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Because the district court’s factual findings, made based on its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, are not clearly erroneous, we affirm those findings and the judgment in favor of the defendant.
Accordingly, we deny Lattimore’s motions for appointment of counsel and to review the transcript, and his motion to show the North Carolina Department of Public Safety violated the sexual violence elimination policy. We affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the material before this court and argument will not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
610 F. App'x 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-lattimore-v-michael-garrett-ca4-2015.