Case ID: f-appx_169/html/0173-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Harry L. DANTZLER, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 05-7016.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 23, 2006.
    Decided March 1, 2006.
    Harry L. Dantzler, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Barton, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Harry L. Dantzler appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to amend the complaint, Fed.R.Civ.P. 15. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Dantzler, No. CR-01-831 (D.S.C. June 24, 2005). We dispense with 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