Carroll v. Reese

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7245

ERNEST LEE CARROLL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

KEVIN REESE; ARTHUR L. THOMAS; GERALDINE STEEDLEY; THOMAS DOBSON,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior District Judge. (9:09-cv-00199-PMD)

Submitted: February 24, 2011 Decided: March 2, 2011

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ernest Lee Carroll, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Blaine Rosbrugh, MBR LAW, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Ernest Lee Carroll 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. Carroll

v. Reese, No. 9:09-cv-00199-PMD (D.S.C. Aug. 25, 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