Daniel C. Bruce, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Sharon N. Odom; Ralston Wright Turbeville; Marion S.riggs; Harold Walker Detwiler, Iii; Davidvelazquez; Vickie Velazquez; Ray E.chandler, Defendants-appellees, 8 F.3d 816 (4th Cir. 1993)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.
Daniel C. Bruce, Appellant Pro Se.
Ralston Wright Turbeville, Marion S. Riggs, Harold Walker Detwiler, III, Appellees.
D.S.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before RUSSELL and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
PER CURIAM:
OPINION
Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court.* Bruce v. Odom, No. CA-91-3319-4 (D.S.C. Sept. 1, 1992 & May 5, 1993). 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
To the extent that Bruce seeks release from custody his claim is properly construed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) action. Because he provided no evidence of exhaustion his complaint is properly dismissed without prejudice. See Hamlin v. Warren, 664 F.2d 29 (4th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 911 (1982)
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
