Filed: Oct. 15, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7864 HOGAN HUGH JUSTICE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARTHA A. WANNAMAKER, DCI Warden; JOSEPH COUNTS, DCI Associate Warden; BURKE BROWN, DCI Principal; DIANE AUSTIN, DCI Librarian; SERGEANT PROPER, Investigating Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-3490-20BC-3) Submitted: September 30, 19
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7864 HOGAN HUGH JUSTICE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARTHA A. WANNAMAKER, DCI Warden; JOSEPH COUNTS, DCI Associate Warden; BURKE BROWN, DCI Principal; DIANE AUSTIN, DCI Librarian; SERGEANT PROPER, Investigating Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-3490-20BC-3) Submitted: September 30, 199..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7864 HOGAN HUGH JUSTICE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARTHA A. WANNAMAKER, DCI Warden; JOSEPH COUNTS, DCI Associate Warden; BURKE BROWN, DCI Principal; DIANE AUSTIN, DCI Librarian; SERGEANT PROPER, Investigating Officer, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-3490-20BC-3) Submitted: September 30, 1997 Decided: October 15, 1997 Before HALL, ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hogan Hugh Justice, Appellant Pro Se. William Ansel Collins, Jr., SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion to vacate its prior order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Justice v. Wannamaker, No. CA-95-3490-20BC-3 (D.S.C. Nov. 4, 1996). 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