Court Opinion

ID: 988979
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 23:00:19.943084+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:44:26.995949
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 95-7919

ROBERT L. SMITH,

                                              Plaintiff - Appellant,

          versus

GEORGE DEEDS, Warden,

                                               Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge.
(CA-95-1088-R)

Submitted:   March 21, 1996                 Decided:   April 10, 1996

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert L. Smith, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Appellant appeals from the district court's orders denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint* and denying his
motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Smith v. Deeds, No. CA-95-1088-R (W.D. Va. Oct. 13, 1995;

Oct. 24, 1995). 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

    *
       Because we find that no amendment to Appellant's complaint
could cure the defects in his case, the district court's order is
a final, appealable order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers
Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).

                                2