Case ID: f-appx_17/html/0189-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jerry Allen BAILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Raine Locke BELL; Graham C. Mullen; Robert Conrad, Jr.; Gordon Widenhouse, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 01-6668.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 23, 2001.
    Decided Aug. 30, 2001.
    Jerry Allen Bailey, pro se.
    Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM.

Jerry Allen Bailey appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his civil rights complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. See Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). Finding that Bailey’s informal brief sufficient to present the issues on appeal, we deny Bailey’s pending motion to file a formal brief. Bailey’s motion to extend the time in which to file a supplemental brief is moot and is denied for that reason. Similarly, we deny Bailey’s motion for counsel and for 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.