Filed: Feb. 26, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7732 CLIFTON PATTERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LARRY W. POWERS, Warden; SPELLER; NFN CARTER; LIEUTENANT PILGRIM; THOMAS MILLER; DOCTOR BIANCO; NFN GREENE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-02-4145-6-22AK) Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7732 CLIFTON PATTERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LARRY W. POWERS, Warden; SPELLER; NFN CARTER; LIEUTENANT PILGRIM; THOMAS MILLER; DOCTOR BIANCO; NFN GREENE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-02-4145-6-22AK) Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7732 CLIFTON PATTERSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LARRY W. POWERS, Warden; SPELLER; NFN CARTER; LIEUTENANT PILGRIM; THOMAS MILLER; DOCTOR BIANCO; NFN GREENE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CA-02-4145-6-22AK) Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clifton Patterson, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Todd Darwin, HOLCOMBE, BOMAR, GUNN & BRADFORD, P.A., Spartanburg, South Carolina; Edward Grainger Smith, BUTLER, MEANS, EVINS & BROWNE, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Clifton Patterson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Patterson v. Powers, No. CA-02-4145-6-22AK (D.S.C. Oct. 16, 2003). 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 -