Case Name: Robert Miller LATTIMORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael A. GARRETT, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-07-23
Citations: 610 F. App'x 252
Docket Number: No. 14-7581
Parties: Robert Miller LATTIMORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael A. GARRETT, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 610
Pages: 252–253

Head Matter:
Robert Miller LATTIMORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael A. GARRETT, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 14-7581.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 25, 2015.
Decided: July 23, 2015.
Robert Miller Lattimore, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Finarelli, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Ap-pellee.
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Miller Lattimore appeals the district court's order denying relief in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Following a bench trial, this court may reverse a district court's factual findings only if they are clearly erroneous. Roanoke Cement Co. v. Falk Corp., 413 F.3d 431, 433 (4th Cir.2005). "[W]hen a district court's factual finding in a bench trial is based upon assessments of witness credibility, such finding is deserving of the highest degree of appellate deference." Evergreen Int'l, S.A. v. Norfolk Dredging Co., 531 F.3d 302, 308 (4th Cir.2008) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Because the district court's factual findings, made based on its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses, are not clearly erroneous, we affirm those findings and the judgment in favor of the defendant.
Accordingly, we deny Lattimore's motions for appointment of counsel and to review the transcript, and his motion to show the North Carolina Department of Public Safety violated the sexual violence elimination policy. We affirm the district court's judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the material before this court and argument will not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.