Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Broten v. Charleston County, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to James M. Broten on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Broten had filed a complaint against Charleston County Detention Center and various officers and administrators alleging violations of his civil rights. The district court denied relief and adopted the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, thus affirming the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in its order.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-07-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-6331

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to James M. Broten on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Broten had filed a complaint against Charleston County Detention Center and various officers and administrators alleging violations of his civil rights. The district court denied relief and adopted the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, thus affirming the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in its order.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views3 pages

    Broten v. Charleston County, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of relief to James M. Broten on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. Broten had filed a complaint against Charleston County Detention Center and various officers and administrators alleging violations of his civil rights. The district court denied relief and adopted the recommendation of the magistrate judge. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error, thus affirming the district court's decision to deny relief for the reasons stated in its order.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 06-6331

    JAMES M. BROTEN, a/k/a Jim Broten,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    CHARLESTON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER; J. ALTON
    CANNON, JR., Sheriff; ROLAND H. WINDHAM, JR.,
    Charleston County Administrator; CHIEF DEPUTY
    K. P. NOVAK, Chief Jailor; OFFICER CCDC
    OFFICER
    FORRESTER;
    OFFICER
    CCDC
    OFFICER
    TIPTON; UNKNOWN, CCDC Tag Team Officers;
    UNKNOWN, CCDC Nurse Betty; JOHN DOES, unknown
    CCDC officers,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    US MARSHALS; D. LYNES, a/k/a D. Lyons, Interim
    Chief United States Marshalls Service,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Anderson. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
    (8:04-cv-01413-RBH)

    Submitted: July 20, 2006

    Decided: July 26, 2006

    Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    James H. Broten, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene P. Corrigan, III, Michael


    J. Ferri, GRIMBALL & CABANISS, Charleston, South Carolina; Robert
    Holmes Hood, HOOD LAW FIRM, Charleston, South Carolina; Robert
    Gerald Chambers, Jr., Ashley S. Heslop, TURNER & PADGETT,
    Charleston, South Carolina; Barbara Murcier Bowens, OFFICE OF THE
    UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    James M. Broten appeals the district courts orders
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
    relief on his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2000) complaint.
    the record and find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed

    Accordingly, we affirm

    for the reasons stated by the district court. Broten v. Charleston


    County Det. Ctr., No. 8:04-cv-01413-RBH (D.S.C. Feb. 15, 2006). We
    dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
    are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 3 -

    You might also like