Filed: Jun. 18, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-7279 MICHAEL ALEXANDER COLLINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; AIKEN COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; SHANNON STURGILL; JENNIFER LAIRD; DAVID HAZE; DOYET A. EARLY, III; MONTFORD SHULER CAUGHMAN; VICKI J. SNELGROVE; WILLIAM P. KEESLEY; EVERETT K. CHANDLER; ASHLEY HAMMOCK; DEPUTY BAKER; DEPUTY WILSON; NURSE SHERRY; NURSE ANGEL; DEPUTY MOORE; NURSE ROBIN; CPL PERRY; DEPUTY PRINCE; SGT BRADLEY; DEPUTY MCDUFFIE;
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-7279 MICHAEL ALEXANDER COLLINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; AIKEN COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; SHANNON STURGILL; JENNIFER LAIRD; DAVID HAZE; DOYET A. EARLY, III; MONTFORD SHULER CAUGHMAN; VICKI J. SNELGROVE; WILLIAM P. KEESLEY; EVERETT K. CHANDLER; ASHLEY HAMMOCK; DEPUTY BAKER; DEPUTY WILSON; NURSE SHERRY; NURSE ANGEL; DEPUTY MOORE; NURSE ROBIN; CPL PERRY; DEPUTY PRINCE; SGT BRADLEY; DEPUTY MCDUFFIE; D..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-7279
MICHAEL ALEXANDER COLLINS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; AIKEN COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT; SHANNON STURGILL; JENNIFER LAIRD; DAVID HAZE;
DOYET A. EARLY, III; MONTFORD SHULER CAUGHMAN; VICKI J.
SNELGROVE; WILLIAM P. KEESLEY; EVERETT K. CHANDLER; ASHLEY
HAMMOCK; DEPUTY BAKER; DEPUTY WILSON; NURSE SHERRY; NURSE
ANGEL; DEPUTY MOORE; NURSE ROBIN; CPL PERRY; DEPUTY PRINCE;
SGT BRADLEY; DEPUTY MCDUFFIE; DEPUTY NIGHTINGALE; DEPUTY
GIBSON; DEPUTY POWELL; DEPUTY JONES; NURSE AMANDA,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Anderson. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (8:18-cv-02596-MGL)
Submitted: June 16, 2020 Decided: June 18, 2020
Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Alexander Collins, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Alexander Collins appeals the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Collins’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983
(2018) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Collins v. South Carolina, No. 8:18-
cv-02596-MGL (D.S.C., Sept. 4, 2019). 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