Benjamin Joyner v. Jon Ozmint

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [998486026-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [998486024-2] Originating case number: 3:09-cv-02524-DCN Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998577899]. Mailed to: Benjamin Joyner. [10-7624]

Download PDF
Appeal: 10-7624 Document: 20 Date Filed: 04/28/2011 Page: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7624 BENJAMIN ANTHONY JOYNER, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. JON OZMINT; WILLIE L. EAGLETON; ANNIE SELLERS; DENNIS R. PATTERSON, Defendants – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, Chief District Judge. (3:09-cv-02524-DCN) Submitted: March 31, 2011 Decided: April 28, 2011 Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Benjamin Anthony Joyner, Appellant Pro Se. Walker Heinitsh Willcox, WILLCOX BUYCK & WILLIAMS, PA, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 10-7624 Document: 20 Date Filed: 04/28/2011 Page: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Benjamin Anthony Joyner 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. have reviewed the record and find no reversible We error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Joyner v. No. Ozmint, 3:09-cv-02524-DCN Sept. 22, 2010; Sept. 23, 2010; Nov. 3, 2010). (D.S.C. We deny Joyner’s motions to appoint counsel and for transcripts at government expense. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

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?