Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Colston v. O'Donald, 01-7732 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-7732 Visitors: 11
Filed: Mar. 05, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7732 ERNEST JUNIOR COLSTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN O’DONALD, Chief of Police for the City of Gaffney; BARBARA BROWN, Nurse; ROCKY JONES, Cherokee County Jail Administrator; BILL BLANTON, Sheriff of Cherokee County, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-803-4) Submitted: February 21, 2002
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7732 ERNEST JUNIOR COLSTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN O’DONALD, Chief of Police for the City of Gaffney; BARBARA BROWN, Nurse; ROCKY JONES, Cherokee County Jail Administrator; BILL BLANTON, Sheriff of Cherokee County, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-803-4) Submitted: February 21, 2002 Decided: March 5, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ernest Junior Colston, Appellant Pro Se. William Benson Darwin, Jr., Walter McElhaney White, HOLCOMBE, BOMAR, GUNN & BRADFORD, P.A., Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ernest Junior Colston appeals the district court’s orders de- nying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Colston v. O’Donald, No. CA-00-803-4 (D.S.C. Aug. 28, 2001, Oct. 30, 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 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer