Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Roderick English v. William Byars, JR., 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Roderick English appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court reviewed the record and agreed with the district court's reasons for denying English's complaint. The court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-08-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6690

    Original Title

    Roderick English v. William Byars, Jr., 4th Cir. (2014)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Roderick English appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court reviewed the record and agreed with the district court's reasons for denying English's complaint. The court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    3 views2 pages

    Roderick English v. William Byars, JR., 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Roderick English appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against prison officials. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The appellate court reviewed the record and agreed with the district court's reasons for denying English's complaint. The court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-6690

    RODERICK JEROME ENGLISH,


    Plaintiff Appellant,
    v.
    WILLIAM R. BYARS, JR.; R. SALTBURG; CHERON M. HESS; ANN
    HALLMAN;
    JANNITA
    GATSON;
    CHRISTOPHER
    FLORAN
    BRADFORD
    DRAWLINSON,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Aiken.
    Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
    Judge. (1:13-cv-02858-JFA)

    Submitted:

    August 21, 2014

    Decided:

    August 26, 2014

    Before SHEDD, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Roderick Jerome English, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Roderick Jerome English appeals the district courts
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2012) complaint.
    have

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    find

    no

    reversible

    We

    error.

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district


    court.

    English v. Byars, No. 1:13-cv-02858-JFA (D.S.C. Apr. 1,

    2014).

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

    legal
    before

    contentions
    this

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like