Court Opinion

ID: 9785020
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 21:01:03.676333+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:03.560907
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6338      Doc: 20         Filed: 08/29/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6338

        THOMAS BLEVINS, a/k/a Tommy Ray Blevins,

                             Plaintiff - Appellant,

                      v.

        DANNY KING, Jail Administrator; FERNIE HYMAN, Food Service Manager,

                             Defendants - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:22-ct-03064-D)

        Submitted: August 24, 2023                                        Decided: August 29, 2023

        Before QUATTLEBAUM and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Thomas Blevins, Appellant Pro Se. Bradley O. Wood, WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON
        (US) LLP, Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Steven Andrew Bader, Marshall Wall,
        CRANFILL SUMNER, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6338      Doc: 20         Filed: 08/29/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Thomas Blevins appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion to

        dismiss Blevins’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Upon review of the record, we discern no abuse

        of discretion. See Mey v. Phillips, 71 F.4th 203, 217 (4th Cir. 2023) (“A district court has

        wide latitude in controlling discovery, and its rulings will not be overturned absent a

        showing of clear abuse of discretion.” (cleaned up)). Accordingly, we affirm the district

        court’s order. Blevins v. King, No. 5:22-ct-03064-D (E.D.N.C. Mar. 23, 2023). We deny

        Blevins’ request for appointment of counsel. 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

                                                     2