Edward Hannah v. State of South Carolina, No. 23-6820 (4th Cir. 2024)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-6820 EDWARD MARKFABIAN HANNAH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; BERKELEY COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT SOLICITOR’S OFFICE; BERKELEY COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE; FARLEY LAW, Mitchell E. Farley, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:23-cv-01487-DCN) Submitted: February 27, 2024 Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Edward Markfabian Hannah, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Decided: March 1, 2024 PER CURIAM: Edward Markfabian Hannah appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Hannah’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Hannah’s informal brief does not challenge the dispositive procedural basis for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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 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.