Dontay Carter-El v. Scott S. Oakley
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:14-cv-02545-JFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999918772]. Mailed to: Dontay Carter-El LEA COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 6900 West Millen Drive Hobbs, NM 88244. [16-6093]
Appeal: 16-6093
Doc: 12
Filed: 08/29/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6093
DONTAY CARTER-EL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SCOTT S. OAKLEY; ROBIN WOOLFORD; LENORA ADEGBESAN; PAULA
WILLIAMS; WARDEN FRANK BISHOP; LT. BRAD WILT; WARDEN RICHARD
GRAHAM, JR.; JAMES TICHNELL, Case Manager; CAPT. BUTLER,
Investigations,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District
Judge. (1:14-cv-02545-JFM)
Submitted:
August 25, 2016
Decided:
August 29, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dontay Carter-El, Appellant Pro Se.
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
OF
MARYLAND,
Appellees.
Ankush Nayar, OFFICE OF THE
Baltimore,
Maryland,
for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6093
Doc: 12
Filed: 08/29/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Dontay
denying
Carter-El
relief
on
his
appeals
42
the
U.S.C.
district
§ 1983
court’s
(2012)
orders
complaint
and
denying his motion to alter or amend the judgment under Fed. R.
Civ.
P.
59(e).
reversible error.
We
have
reviewed
the
record
and
find
no
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court.
Carter-El v. Oakley, 1:14-cv-02545-JFM
(D. Md. filed Nov. 10, 2015 & entered Nov. 12, 2015; filed
Jan. 11, 2016 & entered Jan. 12, 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
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?