U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1994

Richard Valenti v. Michael J. Cavanaugh, Commissioner of the South Carolina Department of Probation, Pardon and Parole Service

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 27, 1994

30 F.3d 132; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 26775; 1994 WL 389871 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Opinion

30 F.3d 132

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Richard VALENTI, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
Michael J. CAVANAUGH, COMMISSIONER of the South Carolina
Department of Probation, Pardon and Parole
Service, Defendant Appellee.

No. 94-6541.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 23, 1994.
Decided July 27, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., District Judge. (CA-93-1872-3-OAK).

Richard Valenti, appellant Pro Se.

Carl Norman Lundberg, South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole & Pardon Service, Columbia, SC, for appellee.

D.S.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before MURNAGHAN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and SPROUSE, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) complaint. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court.* Valenti v. Cavanaugh, No. CA-93-1872-3-OAK (D.S.C. Apr. 12, 1994). We deny Appellant's motion for appointment of counsel and 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.

We note that Appellant is not entitled to relief on his claim of a violation of due process. See Greenholtz v. Inmates of Neb. Parole & Correctional Complex, 442 U.S. 1 (1979); Ewell v. Murray, 11 F.3d 482 (4th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 62 U.S.L.W. 3773 (U.S. 1994); Franklin v. Shields, 569 F.2d 784 (4th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 1003 (1978)

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.