Akbar v. McKinney

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7364 KARIM ABDUL AKBAR, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LIEUTENANT MCKINNEY; SERGEANT RASCOE; G. L. HENRY, Sergeant; J. HAYNES, Warden, Defendants - Appellees, and OFFICER BOWMAN, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-99-496) Submitted: December 20, 2001 Decided: January 14, 2002 Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Karim Abdul Akbar, Appellant Pro Se. John Payne Scherer, II, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Karim Abdul Akbar appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Akbar’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court.* Akbar v. McKinney, No. CA-99-496 (M.D.N.C. July 20, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * To the extent Akbar alleges a due process violation, we note Akbar had an adequate post-deprivation remedy. See Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517 (1984). 2