Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Kitayatuthelezi v. Catoe, 01-6918 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-6918 Visitors: 26
Filed: Oct. 26, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6918 SHADRECK ABDUL BASHSHAR KITAYATUTHELEZI, a/k/a Norman Hayes, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM D. CATOE, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections; LAURIE F. BESSINGER, Warden, Kirkland Correctional Institution; JOYCE BROWN, Warden, MSU-KCI, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. C. Weston Houck, District Judge. (CA-00-1084-
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6918 SHADRECK ABDUL BASHSHAR KITAYATUTHELEZI, a/k/a Norman Hayes, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM D. CATOE, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections; LAURIE F. BESSINGER, Warden, Kirkland Correctional Institution; JOYCE BROWN, Warden, MSU-KCI, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. C. Weston Houck, District Judge. (CA-00-1084-4-12) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 26, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shadreck Abdul Bashshar Kitayatuthelezi, Appellant Pro Se. Henry Ronald Stanley, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Shadreck Kitayatuthelezi appeals the district court’s order accepting a magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. Although the district court noted that Kitayatuthelezi failed to file timely objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation, it found nonetheless, that Kitayatuthelezi’s claims were without merit. 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. See Kitayatuthelezi v. Catoe, No. CA-00-1084-4-12 (D.S.C. May 11, 2001). 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer