The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
04-7482•Ray M. Smith v. JUSTIN MYERS, Correctional Officer, High Security Unit at Polk Youth Institution
04-7482Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 7, 2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7482
RAY M. SMITH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JUSTIN MYERS, Correctional Officer, High
Security Unit at Polk Youth Institution;
BENJAMIN LEA, Sergeant, High Security Unit at
Polk Youth Institution; DENNIS W. VANBUREN,
Lieutenant, High Security Unit at Polk Youth
Institution; KENNETH ADDINGTON, Sergeant, High
Security Unit at Polk Youth Institution; SHAWN
TOOMEY, Correctional Officer, High Security
Unit at Polk Youth Institution; DALE EVANS,
Correctional Officer, High Security Unit at
Polk Youth Institution; JAMES WILLIAMS,
Correctional Officer, High Security Unit at
Polk Youth Institution,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (CA-03-366-5-BO)
Submitted: February 24, 2005 Decided: March 7, 2005
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
Ray M. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth F. Parsons, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Ray M. Smith appeals the district court’s orders denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint alleging excessive
force by prison officers 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
Smith v. Myers, No. CA-03-366-5-BO (E.D.N.C. filed Oct. 17, 2003;
entered Oct. 20, 2003; filed Aug. 23, 2004; entered Aug. 24, 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.