Robinson v. Cranford

Fourth Circuit

Robinson v. Cranford

69 F. App'x 108

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 24, 2003·No. No. 03-6433·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Melvin Eugene Robinson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Robinson v. Cranford, No. CA-03-145-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 27, 2003). 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:

Melvin Eugene Robinson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as frivolous. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Robinson v. Cranford, No. CA-03-145-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 27, 2003). 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.

Robinson v. Cranford, 69 F. App'x 108 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

69 F. App'x 108 (Robinson v. Cranford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related