Knox v. North Carolina

Type

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

Nov. 22, 2011

Case

Knox v. North Carolina

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Nathaniel Knox appeals the district court’s order denying his motion seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The denial of in forma pauperis status is immediately appealable. Roberts v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 339 U.S. 844, 845 , 70 S.Ct. 954 , 94 L.Ed. 1326 (1950) (per curiam). We have reviewed the record and conclude the appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal and affirm the order denying pauper status for the reasons stated by the district court. See Knox v. North Carolina, No. 5:11-cv-00107-BO (E.D.N.C. June 9, 2011). 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.…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.