Filed: Oct. 26, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7580 HENRY BATISTE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. P. LOATHER, City Council Chairman; RANDY BLACKMON, Sheriff; MIKE PEOPLES, Lieutenant, Acting Chief Jailer, Defendants - Appellees, and JASPER COUNTY JAIL; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. C. Weston Houck, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-3313-6-12AK) Submitted: September 22, 19
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7580 HENRY BATISTE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. P. LOATHER, City Council Chairman; RANDY BLACKMON, Sheriff; MIKE PEOPLES, Lieutenant, Acting Chief Jailer, Defendants - Appellees, and JASPER COUNTY JAIL; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. C. Weston Houck, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-3313-6-12AK) Submitted: September 22, 199..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7580 HENRY BATISTE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus D. P. LOATHER, City Council Chairman; RANDY BLACKMON, Sheriff; MIKE PEOPLES, Lieutenant, Acting Chief Jailer, Defendants - Appellees, and JASPER COUNTY JAIL; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. C. Weston Houck, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-3313-6-12AK) Submitted: September 22, 1998 Decided: October 26, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Batiste, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick M. Higgins, HOWELL, GIBSON & HUGHES, P.A., Beaufort, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Batistie v. Loather, No. CA-95-3313-6-12AK (D.S.C. Sept. 30, 1996). 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