Stanley Eugene Woods v. State of South Carolina South Carolina Department of Corrections

Fourth Circuit

Stanley Eugene Woods v. State of South Carolina South Carolina Department of Corrections

74 F.3d 1235, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 38797, 1996 WL 24776

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 24, 1996

Docket95-7459

StatusPublished

This text of 74 F.3d 1235 (Stanley Eugene Woods v. State of South Carolina South Carolina Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stanley Eugene Woods v. State of South Carolina South Carolina Department of Corrections, 74 F.3d 1235, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 38797, 1996 WL 24776 (4th Cir. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

74 F.3d 1235
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Stanley Eugene WOODS, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
STATE of South Carolina; South Carolina Department of
Corrections, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-7459.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 11, 1996.
Decided Jan. 24, 1996.

Stanley Eugene Woods, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Coleman Jones, BOGOSLOW & JONES, Walterboro, South Carolina; Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Woods v. South Carolina, No. CA-94-3283-3-3BC (D.S.C. Aug. 28, 1995). 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

74 F.3d 1235
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Stanley Eugene WOODS, Plaintiff--Appellant,
v.
STATE of South Carolina; South Carolina Department of
Corrections, Defendants--Appellees.

No. 95-7459.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 11, 1996.
Decided Jan. 24, 1996.

Stanley Eugene Woods, Appellant Pro Se. Marvin Coleman Jones, BOGOSLOW & JONES, Walterboro, South Carolina; Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Woods v. South Carolina, No. CA-94-3283-3-3BC (D.S.C. Aug. 28, 1995). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 F.3d 1235, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 38797, 1996 WL 24776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanley-eugene-woods-v-state-of-south-carolina-sou-ca4-1996.