James Rodney Smith v. S. Corr. Inst. Cumberland Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 73 F.3d 358 (4th Cir. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
James Rodney Smith v. S. Corr. Inst. Cumberland Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 73 F.3d 358 (4th Cir. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
44 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Jose Zuniga-Hernandez (ca5, 2017-08-30)
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995 2010 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" United States v. Jose Zuniga-Hernandez
5th Cir. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Carreon-Ibarra, 6 73 F.3d 358 , 362 n.8 (5th Cir. 2012); United States v. Brown, 328 F.3d 787, 789-90 (5th Cir. 2003).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
James Rodney Smith
v.
Southern Correctional Institution Cumberland County Sheriff's Department
95-6994.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jan 4, 1996.
73 F.3d 358
Published

73 F.3d 358
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

James Rodney SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SOUTHERN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; Cumberland County
Sheriff's Department, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 95-6994.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 14, 1995.
Decided: Jan. 4, 1996.

James Rodney Smith, Appellant Pro Se.

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Smith v. Southern Correctional Inst., No. CA-95-247-5-CT-BO (E.D.N.C. June 9, 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