Alexander Pastene v. N. Sprouse

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 0:09-cv-01390-PMD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998415199] [10-1606]

Alexander Pastene v. N. Sprouse

Doc. 0

Case: 10-1606 Document: 18

Date Filed: 08/31/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-1606 ALEXANDER PASTENE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. N. L. SPROUSE, SC Trooper; BC MAGISTRATE NANCY D. SADLER; BC SHERIFF DEPUTY NFN MICHAUD; BC SHERIFF DEPUTY NFN COOLER; BC SHERIFF DEPUTY NFN CREGAN; JONATHAN BROWN, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior District Judge. (0:09-cv-01390-PMD) Submitted: August 26, 2010 Decided: August 31, 2010

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alexander Pastene, Appellant Pro Se. Christy L. Scott, SCOTT & PAYNE LAW FIRM, Walterboro, South Carolina; Mary Bass Lohr, HOWELL, GIBSON & HUGHES, PA, Beaufort, South Carolina; Sterling Graydon Davies, Clary Edward Rawl, Jr., MCANGUS, GOUDELOCK & COURIE, LLP, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-1606 Document: 18

Date Filed: 08/31/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Alexander Pastene 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, Pastene We legal

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

v. Sprouse, No. 0:09-cv-1390-PMD (D.S.C. Mar. 30, 2010). dispense with oral argument because the facts and

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

AFFIRMED

2