Case Name: Ricky BARTLETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Max ROBESON; Anthony Forbes; Jon Worthington, Defendants-Appellees, and Camden Sheriff's Dept., Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-11-27
Citations: 489 F. App'x 743
Docket Number: No. 12-7156
Parties: Ricky BARTLETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Max ROBESON; Anthony Forbes; Jon Worthington, Defendants-Appellees, and Camden Sheriff’s Dept., Defendant.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 489
Pages: 743–744

Head Matter:
Ricky BARTLETT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Max ROBESON; Anthony Forbes; Jon Worthington, Defendants-Appellees, and Camden Sheriff’s Dept., Defendant.
No. 12-7156.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 20, 2012.
Decided: Nov. 27, 2012.
Ricky Bartlett, Appellant Pro Se. Sonny Sade Haynes, Womble Carlyle San-dridge & Rice, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ricky Bartlett appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and his numerous motions for appointment of counsel. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Bartlett v. Robeson, No. 5:11-ct-03008-BO, 2012 WL 2237003 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 21 & June 15, 2012). 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.