Richard Blackburn v. State of South Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [998245623-2] Originating case number: 9:06-cv-02011-PMD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998486842] [09-6677]

Richard Blackburn v. State of South Carolina

Doc. 0

Case: 09-6677 Document: 26

Date Filed: 12/17/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6677 RICHARD E. BLACKBURN, Plaintiff ­ Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS: JON OZMINT, Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections; ROBERT WARD, Regional Director of South Carolina Deparment of Corrections; ROBIN CHAVIS, ECI Associate Warden; MS. SPRATTLING, ECI Grievance Clerk; SANDRA BOWIE, Chief, Branch Grievance; J. GLENN ALEWINE; PRAVIN R. PATEL, Defendants ­ Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior District Judge. (9:06-cv-02011-PMD) Submitted: November 30, 2010 Decided: December 17, 2010

Before NIEMEYER and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard E. Blackburn, Appellant Pro Se. Bradford Cary Andrews, Samuel F. Arthur, III, AIKEN, BRIDGES, NUNN, ELLIOTT & TYLER, PA, Florence, South Carolina; Benjamin Albert Baroody, BELLAMY,

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 09-6677 Document: 26

Date Filed: 12/17/2010

Page: 2

RUTENBURG, COPELAND, EPPS, GRAVELY & BOWERS, PA, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Case: 09-6677 Document: 26

Date Filed: 12/17/2010

Page: 3

PER CURIAM: Richard order adopting in E. Blackburn the appeals the district of the court's

part

recommendation

magistrate

judge and denying relief on his civil action. the record and find no reversible error.

We have reviewed

Accordingly, we deny

Blackburn's motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated No. with by the district court. (D.S.C. because Blackburn Mar. the 11, facts v. South We legal

Carolina, dispense

9:06-cv-02011-PMD oral argument

2009). and

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3