Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07753/USCOURTS-ca4-15-07753-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7753

MITCHELL LEE SUMPTER, a/k/a Mitchell Lee Truman Sumpter, 

a/k/a Mitchell L. Sumpter, a/k/a Mitchell Sumpter,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

A. LANE CRIBB, Sheriff of Georgetown County, All in their 

individual capacity and official capacity; MICHAEL A. 

SCHWARTZ, Chief Administrator, All in their individual 

capacity and official capacity; MAJOR MORTON, All in their 

individual capacity and official capacity; CAPT. WINEGLASS, 

All in their individual capacity and official capacity; LT. 

ANDERSON, All in their individual capacity and official 

capacity; SGT. HARRISON, All in their individual capacity and 

official capacity; CHAPLAIN WILLIAMS, All in their individual 

capacity and official capacity; FOOD SUPERVISOR WALKER, All 

in their individual capacity and official capacity; SGT. 

WRAGG, All in their individual capacity and official capacity; 

SGT. HARRIS, All in their individual capacity and official 

capacity; SGT. DRYER, All in their individual capacity and 

official capacity; SGT. WILLIAMS, All in their individual 

capacity and official capacity; OFFICER POINCET, All in their 

individual capacity and official capacity; OFFICER MANOR, All 

in their individual capacity and official capacity; OFFICER 

GIBBS, All in their individual capacity and official capacity; 

OFFICER OLIVER, All in their individual capacity and official 

capacity; OFFICER PEREZ, All in their individual capacity and 

official capacity; OFFICER ROBINSON, All in their individual 

capacity and official capacity; OFFICER MATTHEWS, All in their 

individual capacity and official capacity; OFFICER WASHINTON, 

All in their individual capacity and official capacity; 

SERGEANT TEETER, All in their individual capacity and official 

capacity; MR. MARTIN, Maintenance, All in their individual 

capacity and official capacity; LT. CLAREY, All in their 

individual capacity and official capacity,

Defendants – Appellees,

Appeal: 15-7753 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/01/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

and

GEORGETOWN COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, All in their individual 

capacity and official capacity; SOUTHERN HEALTH PARTNERS, All 

in their individual capacity and individual capacity; NURSE 

CONNIE, a/k/a Constance Reichard, All in their individual 

capacity and official capacity; NURSE DOREAN, a/k/a Doreen 

McLean, All in their individual capacity and official 

capacity; DR. REEVES, a/k/a Thomas Rives, All in their 

individual capacity and official capacity; ALL MAINTENANCE 

STAFF, All in their individual capacity and official capacity; 

ALL LIEUTENANTS, All in their individual capacity and official 

capacity; ALL SERGEANTS, All in their individual capacity and 

official capacity; ALL CORPORALS, All in their individual 

capacity and official capacity; ALL OFFICERS, All in their 

individual capacity and official capacity,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Anderson. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. 

(8:14-cv-00180-MGL)

Submitted: March 29, 2016 Decided: April 1, 2016

Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mitchell Lee Sumpter, Appellant Pro Se. David Cornwell Holler, 

LEE ERTER WILSON HOLLER & SMITH, LLC, Sumter, South Carolina, for 

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-7753 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/01/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Mitchell Lee Sumpter appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed 

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

for the reasons stated by the district court. Sumpter v. Cribb, 

No. 8:14-cv-00180-MGL (D.S.C. Sept. 23, 2015). We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 15-7753 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/01/2016 Pg: 3 of 3