Case ID: f-appx_553/html/0337-01.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

William T. COLEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 16TH CIRCUIT COURT; York County Public Defenders Office; Melissa Inzerillo, others may be amended; Jessica Holland; Lee Alfred, 16th Circuit Court Judge; 16th Circuit Solicitors Office, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 13-7282.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 27, 2014.
    Decided: Feb. 4, 2014.
    William T. Coleman, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

William T. Coleman appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We conclude, as did magistrate judge and the district court, that Coleman’s Section 1983 claims are barred by the Supreme Court’s decision in Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87, 114 S.Ct. 2364, 129 L.Ed.2d 383 (1994). We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.