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)
07-4866•Roy L. Smith v. MS REDFEARN MILLER, Grievance Officer at Evans CI
07-4866Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitApr 1, 2008
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7156
ROY L. SMITH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
MS REDFEARN MILLER, Grievance Officer at Evans CI,
Defendant – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge.
(9:07-cv-01774-HFF)
Submitted: October 14, 2008 Decided: October 20, 2008
Before KING, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Roy L. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. John Evans James, III, JOHN E.
JAMES II LAW OFFICE, Winnsboro, South Carolina; Lucy Grey Wilson
McIver, LEE, ERTER, WILSON, JAMES, HOLLER & SMITH, LLC, Sumter,
South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Roy L. Smith 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 affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Smith v. Miller, No. 9:07-cv-01774-HFF (D.S.C. June 16, 2008).
We deny Smith’s motion for appointment of 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.