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UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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]
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UNPUBLISHED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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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?