Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Brown v. Bamberg, 07-6894 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 07-6894 Visitors: 15
Filed: Oct. 17, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6894 KELVIN BROWN, a/k/a Kelvin Demeatrius Brown, a/k/a Kelvin D. Brown, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIE J. BAMBERG, Deputy Director, in their individual and official capacities as Orangeburg Calhoun Regional Detention Center employees; HORACE JAMES, Chief, in their individual and official capacities as Orangeburg Calhoun Regional Detention Center employees; JERMAINE DOWNING, in their individual and official capacities
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6894 KELVIN BROWN, a/k/a Kelvin Demeatrius Brown, a/k/a Kelvin D. Brown, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIE J. BAMBERG, Deputy Director, in their individual and official capacities as Orangeburg Calhoun Regional Detention Center employees; HORACE JAMES, Chief, in their individual and official capacities as Orangeburg Calhoun Regional Detention Center employees; JERMAINE DOWNING, in their individual and official capacities as Orangeburg Calhoun Regional Detention Center employees, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (8:04-cv-22925-TLW) Submitted: October 11, 2007 Decided: October 17, 2007 Before MICHAEL and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kelvin Demeatrius Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Christy Scott Stephens, BOGOSLOW, JONES, STEPHENS & DUFFIE, PA, Walterboro, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Kelvin Demeatrius Brown appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Brown v. Bamberg, No. 8:04-cv-22925-TLW (D.S.C. Mar. 28 & May 22, 2007). We deny Brown’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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 - 3 -
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