Truesdale v. Ashcroft, No. 06-7092 (4th Cir. 2006)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7092 ALVIN BERNARD TRUESDALE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOHN D. ASHCROFT; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director; R. E. HOLT, Southeast Regional Director for Federal Bureau of Prisons; JOSEPH V. SMITH, Warden; OFFICER BROOKS, Unit Manager at FCI-Edgefield; D. TAYLOR, Case Manager at FCI-Edgefield; JOHN DOE; JANE DOE, I, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. David C. Norton, District Judge. (8:05-cv-00078-DCN) Submitted: October 17, 2006 Decided: October 23, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alvin Bernard Truesdale, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Alvin Bernard Truesdale appeals the district court s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and denying his motion for reconsideration. reviewed the record and find no reversible error. We have Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Truesdale v. Ashcroft, No. 8:05-cv-00078-DCN (D.S.C. Mar. 29, 30 & Apr. 21, 2006). We deny Truesdale s pending motions to disqualify the Defendants counsel, to appoint counsel for him, to hold these proceedings in abeyance or to compel, for a conference, and for publication of the opinion in this case. 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 - 3 -

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.