Case ID: f-appx_286/html/0047-01.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

Ernest DOE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, The Classification System; Jon Ozmint, Director, South Carolina Department of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 08-6666.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 31, 2008.
    Decided: Aug. 11, 2008.
    Ernest Doe, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding-precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

Ernest Doe appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Doe v. South Carolina Dep’t. of Corr., No. 3:07-cv-04109-CMC (D.S.C. filed Feb. 13, 2008; entered Feb. 14, 2008). Doe’s motions for appointment of counsel and to amend the complaint are denied. 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.