Case ID: f-appx_367/html/0408-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Alphonso HAYNESWORTH, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Jon Ozmint, Director of SCDC; Warden Bob Anderson; Associate Warden NFN Brillford; Major NFN Murray; Captain Edward Bittinger; Lieutenant NFN Brachel; Sergeant NFN Ferguson; Officer NFN Foreman; Sergeant NFN Hoosier; Ms. NFN Hunter; Officer Jenkins; Officer Jones; Dho S. Patterson; Ms. NFN Hunter, Law Librarian; Officer NFN Staats; Officer NFN Uptergraff; Mr. NFN Stevenson, Classification; Captain B. Hinger; Officer Uptagraft, Defendants — Appellees.
    No. 09-7897.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Feb. 18, 2010.
    Decided: Feb. 25, 2010.
    Alphonso Haynesworth, Appellant Pro Se. Heath McAlvin Stewart, III, Riley, Pope & Laney, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alphonso Haynesworth appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 1986 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Haynesworth v. South Carolina Dep’t of Corr., No. 8:08-cv-01841-PMD, 2009 WL 3233470 (D.S.C. Sept. 30, 2009). 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.