Filed: Apr. 04, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7608 ROBERT LEWIS JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; RICHLAND COUNTY; RICHARD A. HARPOOTLIAN, Solicitor, 5th Judi- cial Circuit; RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF'S DE- PARTMENT; UNION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; ALLEN SLOAN, Sheriff of Richland County; JIM PALMER; ELIZABETH HANCOCK; BEAU MOORE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Gr
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7608 ROBERT LEWIS JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; RICHLAND COUNTY; RICHARD A. HARPOOTLIAN, Solicitor, 5th Judi- cial Circuit; RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF'S DE- PARTMENT; UNION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; ALLEN SLOAN, Sheriff of Richland County; JIM PALMER; ELIZABETH HANCOCK; BEAU MOORE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Gre..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 95-7608 ROBERT LEWIS JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; RICHLAND COUNTY; RICHARD A. HARPOOTLIAN, Solicitor, 5th Judi- cial Circuit; RICHLAND COUNTY SHERIFF'S DE- PARTMENT; UNION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY; ALLEN SLOAN, Sheriff of Richland County; JIM PALMER; ELIZABETH HANCOCK; BEAU MOORE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-3009-6-3-AK) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 4, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Lewis Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying re- lief on his 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 (1988) 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. Johnson v. South Carolina, No. CA-95-3009-6-3AK (D.S.C. Oct. 5, 1995). 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