UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6492
JAMES MICHAEL GARREN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CHRIS RAYMOND; UNKNOWN OFFICERS, Spartanburg
Sheriff’s Office; CITIZEN,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(9:07-cv-00408-DCN)
Submitted: July 27, 2007 Decided: October 3, 2007
Before MICHAEL, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Michael Garren, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Michael Garren appeals the district court’s orders
accepting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and
dismissing his civil complaint without prejudice. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error.* Accordingly, we affirm
for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge and adopted by the
district court following de novo review that Garren’s complaint was
barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). See Garren v.
Raymond, No. 9:07-cv-00408-DCN (D.S.C. Mar. 9 and Mar. 19, 2007).
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
*
Although the district court expressly stated it conducted a
de novo review of the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation,
we conclude the district court incorrectly found Garren’s
objections to the report and recommendation were untimely. The
magistrate judge issued his report on February 16, 2007, and under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), (e), objections were due on March 8, 2007.
Though the district court stamped Garren’s objections as received
on March 9, 2007, we find the objections should have been deemed
timely filed on March 7, 2007, pursuant to Houston v. Lack, 487
U.S. 266 (1988). Because the district court nonetheless conducted
a de novo review, we conclude this error was harmless.
- 2 -