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)
16-7231•Charles A. Williams v. Sgt. T. Crosson; C/o McDonald; C/o Godfrey; Superintendent Ryan; Lt. Burge
16-7231Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 3, 2017
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7231
CHARLES A. WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SGT. T. CROSSON; C/O MCDONALD; C/O GODFREY; SUPERINTENDENT
RYAN; LT. BURGE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:14-ct-03308-F)
Submitted: April 24, 2017 Decided: May 3, 2017
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles A. Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Vanessa N. Totten, Assistant Attorney General,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Charles A. Williams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we deny Williams’ motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Williams v. Crosson, No. 5:14-ct-03308-F (E.D.N.C.
Sept. 1, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.