Burgess v. Martin

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7191

HENRY BURGESS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

LYNN MARTIN; JAMES B. ELLISOR; JIM HODGES; CARROLL A. CAMPBELL, JR.; WILLIAM DOUG CATOE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:09-cv-01247-RBH)

Submitted: November 18, 2010 Decided: December 2, 2010

Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Henry Burgess, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina; Steven Barry Johnson, LEE ERTER WILSON HOLLER & SMITH, LLC, Sumter, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Henry Burgess appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his civil complaint. We have reviewed the record and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the

reasons stated by the district court. Burgess v. Martin, No.

4:09-cv-01247-RBH (D.S.C. July 14, 2010). 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