Adrian Bacon v. C. Rose

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999459313-2]. Originating case number: 7:13-cv-00350-JPJ-PMS. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999530828]. Mailed to: Appellant. [14-7475]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-7475 Doc: 16 Filed: 02/19/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7475 ADRIAN NATHANIEL BACON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CORRECTIONAL OFFICER C. ROSE, Defendant – Appellee, and PAUL PAYNE; J. MCQUINN, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James P. Jones, District Judge. (7:13-cv-00350-JPJ-PMS) Submitted: February 12, 2015 Decided: February 19, 2015 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Adrian Nathaniel Bacon, Appellant Pro Se. Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 14-7475 Doc: 16 Filed: 02/19/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Adrian order denying court’s judge order and his motion accepting denying complaint. error. Nathaniel Bacon for the relief appeals the appointment of recommendation on Bacon’s 42 district counsel of U.S.C. the court’s and the magistrate § 1983 (2012) We have reviewed the record and find no reversible Accordingly, we deny Bacon’s pending motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Va. May 1, Bacon v. Rose, No. 7:13-cv-00350-JPJ-PMS (W.D. 2014; Sept. 10, 2014). 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

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?