The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
05-6141•Jessie James Richmond v. W. Sweeting
05-6141Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 29, 2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6141
JESSIE JAMES RICHMOND,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
W. SWEETING; W. IRVING; A. W. HENDERSON,
JOSEPH SMITH, Warden of Federal Correctional
Institution at Edgefield,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (CA-
04-1214-4-BH)
Submitted: June 23, 2005 Decided: June 29, 2005
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jessie James Richmond, Appellant Pro Se. Raymond Emery Clark,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Jessie James Richmond appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny
Richmond’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. See Richmond V. Sweeting,
No. CA-04-1214-4-BH (D.S.C. Dec. 23, 2004). 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.