Case ID: f-appx_421/html/0304-01.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

Craig Latwain CHESTNUT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Turbeville Correction Institution; Charles Brown, SCDC Employee Officer, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 10-7748.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 31, 2011.
    Decided: April 6, 2011.
    Craig Latwain Chestnut, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Craig Latwain Chestnut appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Chestnut’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Chestnut v. S.C. Dep’t of Corr., No. 3:10-cv-02050-RMG (D.S.C. Oct. 26, 2010). 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.