Raymond Edward Chestnut v. Toni McCoy

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999477590-2], denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999458266-2] Originating case number: 1:13-cv-01814-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999631060]. Mailed to: Chestnut. [14-7411]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-7411 Doc: 26 Filed: 07/30/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7411 RAYMOND EDWARD CHESTNUT, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. TONI MCCOY, correctional officer, individual capacity, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (1:13-cv-01814-RBH) Submitted: July 1, 2015 Decided: July 30, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Raymond Edward Chestnut, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 14-7411 Doc: 26 Filed: 07/30/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Raymond Edward Chestnut appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Chestnut v. McCoy, No. 1:13-cv-01814-RBH (D.S.C. Aug. 20, 2014). denied. legal before Chestnut’s motions for appointment of counsel are We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED * The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation as modified to reflect that the action is deemed a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2012) due to its frivolousness. 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?