Alfutir Mayweather v. W. Guice, No. 20-6299 (4th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6299 ALFUTIR KAREEM IDEEN MAYWEATHER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. W. DAVID GUICE, Commissioner, Department of Public Safety NC, Official and Individual Capacity; GEORGE T. SOLOMON, Director, Department of Public Safety NC, Official and Individual Capacity; CAPTAIN AUER, Security Risk Group Captain, Hyde Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity; OFFICER LOCKLEAR, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, Hyde Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity; G. SWINK, Programs Director, Marion Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity; LIEUTENANT BANKS, Shipping and Receiving, Marion Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity, Defendants - Appellees, and SERGEANT SPENCER, Investigating Officer, Hyde Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity; H. CORPENING, Correctional Administrator, Marion Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity; J. JENKINS, Correctional Planner, Marion Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity; KEITH TURNER, Unit Manager, Marion Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity; JOHN DOE, Correctional Officer, Hyde Correctional Institute, Official and Individual Capacity, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Frank D. Whitney, Chief District Judge. (1:17-cv-00100-FDW) Submitted: May 19, 2020 Decided: May 22, 2020 Before NIEMEYER, HARRIS, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alfutir Kareem Ideen Mayweather, Appellant Pro Se. Alex Ryan Williams, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Alfutir Kareem Ideen Mayweather appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Defendants in his civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2018), confining his appeal to the district court’s denial of relief on his claim for denial of access to the courts. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Mayweather v. Guice, No. 1:17-cv-00100-FDW (W.D.N.C. Feb. 6, 2020). 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 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.
