John Baccus v. Edgar Clements, III, No. 18-6163 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6163 JOHN BACCUS, a/k/a John Baccus Roosevelt, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. EDGAR L. CLEMENTS, III; VON DEAN TURBEVILLE; BARRY PROSSER; AMBER MCDANIEL THOMPSON; KEITH LUTCKEN; BRIAN WALLACE; PAUL BAKER; MICHELLE DIXON; JOHN BLACK, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. David C. Norton, District Judge. (4:17-cv-01851-DCN) Submitted: June 21, 2018 Decided: June 26, 2018 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Roosevelt Baccus, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: John Roosevelt Baccus seeks to appeal from the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice Baccus’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. Finding no error, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. * See Baccus v. Clements, No. 4:17-cv-01851-DCN (D.S.C. Jan. 23, 2018). We deny Baccus’s motions for a transcript at Government expense and for appointment of counsel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * The grounds of the dismissal make clear that no amendment could cure the defects in Baccus’s case. Therefore, the order is final and appealable. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 625, 629-30 (4th Cir. 2015). 2

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.