Filed: Dec. 20, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7404 LEROY SHAW, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM R. BYARS, Director; LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden; SCOTT LEWIS, Assistant Warden; JAMES PARKER, Assistant Warden; FRANK MURSIER, Major; ALLESON GLIDEWELL, Hearing Officer; LORIS HOLMES, Inmate Grievance Coordinator, individually and his official capacity; MRS. JOYCE YOUNG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7404 LEROY SHAW, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WILLIAM R. BYARS, Director; LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden; SCOTT LEWIS, Assistant Warden; JAMES PARKER, Assistant Warden; FRANK MURSIER, Major; ALLESON GLIDEWELL, Hearing Officer; LORIS HOLMES, Inmate Grievance Coordinator, individually and his official capacity; MRS. JOYCE YOUNG, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at B..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7404
LEROY SHAW,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
WILLIAM R. BYARS, Director; LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden; SCOTT
LEWIS, Assistant Warden; JAMES PARKER, Assistant Warden;
FRANK MURSIER, Major; ALLESON GLIDEWELL, Hearing Officer;
LORIS HOLMES, Inmate Grievance Coordinator, individually and
his official capacity; MRS. JOYCE YOUNG,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(9:12-cv-00520-RBH)
Submitted: December 17, 2013 Decided: December 20, 2013
Before KING, GREGORY, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leroy Shaw, Appellant Pro Se. James Victor McDade, DOYLE,
O’ROURKE, TATE & MCDADE, PA, Anderson, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
LeRoy Shaw appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Shaw v.
Byars, No. 9:12-cv-00520-RBH (D.S.C. Aug. 20, 2013). We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2