Michael Harris v. Judge Peter Messitte

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:12-cv-03807-RWT. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999091429]. Mailed to: Michael Harris. [13-1119, 13-1120]

Download PDF
Appeal: 13-1119 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/22/2013 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1119 MICHAEL EVERRETT HARRIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. JUDGE PETER J. MESSITTE; ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER, JR., Defendants - Appellees. No. 13-1120 MICHAEL EVERRETT HARRIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. U.S. JUDGE PAUL Attorney General, VICTOR NIEMEYER; ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:12-cv-03807-RWT; 8:12-cv-03809-RWT) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 22, 2013 Appeal: 13-1119 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/22/2013 Pg: 2 of 3 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Everrett Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 13-1119 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/22/2013 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Michael Everrett Harris appeals the district court’s order consolidating his civil complaints against the United States Attorney General and two federal judicial officers and dismissing those complaints as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) (2006). We reversible error. have reviewed the record and find no Accordingly, we deny Harris’ requests for counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Harris v. Niemeyer, Case No. 8:12-cv-03807-RWT (D. Md. Jan. 10, 2013); Harris v. Messitte, Case No. 8:12-cv-03809-RWT (D. Md. Jan. 10, 2013). facts and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?