U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2003

Ross v. State of SC

Ross v. State of SC
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided December 4, 2003

Ross v. State of SC

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7263

NORRIS ROSS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLESTON COUNTY; CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; HENRY DARGAN MCMASTER, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees.

No. 03-7277

NORRIS ROSS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

SOUTH CAROLINA, State; CHARLESTON COUNTY; CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; HENRY DARGAN MCMASTER, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-03-2169-2, CA-03-2205-2-18AJ) Submitted: November 19, 2003 Decided: December 4, 2003

Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Norris Ross, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Norris Ross, a South Carolina pre-trial detainee, appeals from the district court’s orders accepting the reports and recommendations of a magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petitions for lack of jurisdiction. Our review of the record and the district court’s opinions discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ross v. South Carolina, Nos. CA-03-2169-2; CA-03-2205-2-18AJ (D.S.C. filed Aug.

6, 2003 & entered Aug. 7, 2003; Aug. 13, 2003). 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

AFFIRMED

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