Filed: Feb. 14, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7329 JASPER NAPOLEON BUCHANAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM D. CATOE; RICKIE HARRISON; BONNIE BURELLE BROWN; K. WHITE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-3185-08BD) Submitted: February 8, 2001 Decided: February 14, 2001 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by u
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7329 JASPER NAPOLEON BUCHANAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM D. CATOE; RICKIE HARRISON; BONNIE BURELLE BROWN; K. WHITE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-3185-08BD) Submitted: February 8, 2001 Decided: February 14, 2001 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by un..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7329 JASPER NAPOLEON BUCHANAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM D. CATOE; RICKIE HARRISON; BONNIE BURELLE BROWN; K. WHITE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-99-3185-08BD) Submitted: February 8, 2001 Decided: February 14, 2001 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jasper Napoleon Buchanan, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Eric Petersen, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Jasper Napoleon Buchanan appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) com- plaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin- ion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Buchanan v. Catoe, No. CA-99-3185-08BD (D.S.C. Aug. 18, 2000). We deny Buchanan’s motion to proceed under the Prison Litigation Reform Act and 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