Fernando Palma Carias v. Donnie Harrison, No. 17-6490 (4th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6490 FERNANDO PALMA CARIAS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DONNIE HARRISON, Sheriff; E. A. BLOMGREN, Investigator; JAMES MICHAEL CORNAIRE, Deputy Sheriff; DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY DIRECTOR; UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT AGENCY DIRECTOR; CHRISTOPHER BRANT; TOM HALVAS; ERIC HOLDER; UNIDENTIFIED INDEMNITOR FOR WAKE COUNTY; WILLIAM ATWELL; LANCE ANTHONY; MICHAEL WILLIAMS; D. TAYLOR; K. MANNING, Defendants - Appellees, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Party-in-Interest - Appellee, and DWIGHT YOKUM; NARDINE MARY GUIRGUIS; DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:13-ct-03264-FL; 5:14-ct-3104-FL) Submitted: November 20, 2017 Decided: December 4, 2017 Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fernando Palma Carias, Appellant Pro Se. Roger Allen Askew, John Albert Maxfield, Virginia Claire Tharrington, WAKE COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Rudy E. Renfer, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina; Robert Edward Nunley, NUNLEY & ASSOCIATES, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina; Walter A. Schmidlin, III, STEWART & SCHMIDLIN, PLLC, Smithfield, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Fernando Palma Carias appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983 (2012); Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971); the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (2012); the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (2012); and provisions of North Carolina state law. We have reviewed the record in light of Carias’ arguments on appeal and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. * Carias v. Harrison, Nos. 5:13-ct-03264-FL; 5:14-ct-3104-FL (E.D.N.C. Mar. 23, 2016 & Mar. 27, 2017). We deny Carias’ motion for a transcript at government expense. 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 * As to Carias’ Fourth Amendment claims regarding surveillance equipment in his vehicle, we conclude that Carias’ self-serving statements are insufficient to create genuine issues of material fact that must be submitted to the jury. 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.