Rogers v. Bullock

Fourth Circuit

Rogers v. Bullock

280 F. App'x 286

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 2, 2008·No. No. 07-7551·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Charles Gene Rogers appeals the order of the magistrate judge denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Rogers v. Bullock, No. 1:06-cv00350-PTS, 2007 WL 2712922 (M.D.N.C. Sept. 14, 2007). 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:

Charles Gene Rogers appeals the order of the magistrate judge denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Rogers v. Bullock, No. 1:06-cv00350-PTS, 2007 WL 2712922 (M.D.N.C. Sept. 14, 2007). 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.

Rogers v. Bullock, 280 F. App'x 286 (4th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

280 F. App'x 286 (Rogers v. Bullock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related