Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    Poe v. Ozmint, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Richard Poe appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against South Carolina Department of Corrections officials and medical staff. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The Fourth Circuit denied Poe's motion for appointment of counsel and affirmed the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its December 5, 2006 ruling.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Poe v. Ozmint, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views3 pages
    Richard Poe appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against South Carolina Department of Corrections officials and medical staff. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The Fourth Circuit denied Poe's motion for appointment of counsel and affirmed the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its December 5, 2006 ruling.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-06-21 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-8030

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Richard Poe appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against South Carolina Department of Corrections officials and medical staff. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The Fourth Circuit denied Poe's motion for appointment of counsel and affirmed the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its December 5, 2006 ruling.

    Copyright:

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

    Poe v. Ozmint, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Richard Poe appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against South Carolina Department of Corrections officials and medical staff. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, finding no reversible error after reviewing the record. The Fourth Circuit denied Poe's motion for appointment of counsel and affirmed the district court's decision for the reasons stated in its December 5, 2006 ruling.

    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. 06-8030

    RICHARD KEITH POE,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    JON
    OZMINT,
    Director,
    South
    Carolina
    Department of Corrections; JOSEPH L. ANDERSON,
    Warden; SANDRA BARRETT; CHARLOTTE GRECO; SAM
    STRICKLAND; LISA PARNELL, Nurse,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    MEDICAL STAFF; CORRECTIONAL STAFF,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
    Judge. (0:05-cv-01568-CMC)

    Submitted:

    May 31, 2007

    Decided:

    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    June 21, 2007

    Richard Keith Poe, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel Roy Settana, Jr., John
    Eric Kaufmann, MCKAY, CAUTHEN, SETTANA & STUBLEY, P.A., Columbia,
    South Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Richard Keith Poe appeals the district courts order
    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 deny

    Poes motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons
    stated by the district court. Poe v. Ozmint, No. 0:05-cv-01568-CMC
    (D.S.C. Dec. 5, 2006).
    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 3 -

    You might also like