Christopher Odom v. State of South Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999954030-2] Originating case number: 5:16-cv-02674-RMG Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000024803]. Mailed to: Christopher Odom. [16-2121]

Appeal: 16-2121

Doc: 15

Filed: 02/16/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-2121

CHRISTOPHER A. ODOM,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; JASON KING, Public Defender;
CHARLES PATRICK, Solicitor; JUDGE
MULLINS; SOUTH CAROLINA
BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD; JUDGE JAMES GOSNELL; MAYOR JOE
RILEY, City of Charleston; GOVERNOR NIKKI HALEY; MAYOR
KEITH SUMNEY, North Charleston; JUDGE GARFINKEL; JUDGE
KRISTI HARRINGTON; JUDGE JEFFERSON; STATE ATTORNEY ALAN
WILSON; P.D. ASHLEY PENNINGTON; PROSECUTOR SCARLETT WILSON;
MICHAEL GRANT; MUSC; DOLLAR TREE; CARTA BUS CO.; CARTA BUS
WHEELCHAIR LIFT MANUFACTURER; CARTA BUS INSURER; CARTA BUS
DRIVER; OFFICER CHERRY, of Charleston Police Dep't; OFFICER
HO, of Charleston Police Dep't; UNKNOWN POLICE OFFICER,
with Officer Ho on Dec. 16, 2014; OFFICER TUGYA, of
Charleston Police Dep't; CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; CITY
OF NORTH CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; CITY OF CHARLESTON
TAXPAYERS; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TAXPAYERS; COUNTY OF
CHARLESTON TAXPAYERS; CITY OF NORTH CHARLESTON TAXPAYERS;
FNU LNU, Female Victim Advocate; DR. STEPHANIE MONTGOMERY;
CHAMPUS, Insurer; FNU LNU, Doctors from MUSC who approved
placement of Plaintiff in SCDMH,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg.
Richard M. Gergel, District
Judge. (5:16-cv-02674-RMG)

Submitted:

January 27, 2017

Decided:

February 16, 2017

Appeal: 16-2121

Doc: 15

Filed: 02/16/2017

Before NIEMEYER and
Senior Circuit Judge.

TRAXLER,

Pg: 2 of 3

Circuit

Judges,

and

HAMILTON,

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher A. Odom, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-2121

Doc: 15

Filed: 02/16/2017

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Christopher
adopting

the

A.

Odom

magistrate

appeals

the

judge’s

district

court’s

recommendation,

order

dismissing

Odom’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (2012), and imposing a
pre-filing injunction.
reversible

error.

We have reviewed the record and find no

Accordingly,

we

deny

leave

to

proceed

in

formal pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by
the district court.

Odom v. South Carolina, No. 5:16-cv-02674-

RMG (D.S.C. Sept. 15, 2016).

We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3