Filed: Oct. 28, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6944 TITO LEMONT KNOX, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RT. GRAHAM, Officer; DEPT. GARNER, JE 0136, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (9:07-cv-00283-HMH) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 28, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tito L
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6944 TITO LEMONT KNOX, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RT. GRAHAM, Officer; DEPT. GARNER, JE 0136, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (9:07-cv-00283-HMH) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 28, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tito Le..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6944 TITO LEMONT KNOX, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RT. GRAHAM, Officer; DEPT. GARNER, JE 0136, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (9:07-cv-00283-HMH) Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 28, 2008 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tito Lemont Knox, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Miller Snyder, CLARKSON, WALSH, RHENEY & TERRELL, PA, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tito Lemont Knox 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. Knox v. Graham, No. 9:07-cv-00283-HMH (D.S.C. May 27, 2008). 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 2
