Jones v. Moore

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6616 ALBERT JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL MOORE; WILLIAM D. CATOE; GEORGE N. MARTIN, III; WILLIAM DAVIS; S. HUNTER RENTZ, Doctor; MARIA BLANDSHAW; DEBORAH T. SMITH; ROSE MARY MURPHY; JAMES BRYAN; JOHN PATE, JR., Doctor, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Falcon B. Hawkins, Chief District Judge. (CA-96-3101-2-11) Submitted: July 30, 1998 Decided: August 26, 1998 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert Jones, Appellant Pro Se. James E. Parham, Jr., Columbia, South Carolina; William Llewellyn Pope, POPE & RODGERS, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find to the extent that Appellant’s objections to the magistrate judge’s report were sufficient to preserve appellate review, there was no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Jones v. Moore, No. CA-96-3101-2-11 (D.S.C. Apr. 6, 1998); see also Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). We deny Jones’s motion to appoint counsel. 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 2