Terrance Haggins v. Burt
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
TERRANCE T. HAGGINS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BURT, Warden of Lieber Correctional Institution, in his individual capacity; BOYD, Lieber Correctional Institution, in her individual capacity; DEBORAH ROWE, Lieber Correctional Institution, Disciplinary Hearing Officer, in her individual capacity; FRANKLIN E. JONES; FULLER, Officer, Lieber Correctional Institution, in his individual capacity; CHARLES RODGERS, Officer, Lieber Correctional Institution, in his individual capacity; JENKINS, Lieber Correctional Institution Grievance Coordinator, in her individual capacity; WILLIAMS, Officer, Lieber Correctional Institution, in his individual capacity, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (4:07-cv-00931-HMH)
June 11, 2008
November 10, 2008
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Terrance T. Haggins, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene P. Corrigan, III, Jacqueline Gottfried Grau, GRIMBALL & CABANISS, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -
PER CURIAM: Terrance T. Haggins, a South Carolina prisoner, appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district
court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, and we find no reversible error. the reasoning of the district court. Accordingly, we affirm on See Haggins v. Burt, No. We also deny Haggins'
4:07-cv-00931-HMH (D.S.C. March 12, 2008). motion for appointment of counsel.
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
- 3 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?