Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06155/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06155-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Marcus Daniel Allison
Appellant
Casey Bowling
Appellee
Wilson Burr
Appellee
Don Doe

John Doe

Ron Doe

Elizabeth Holcomb
Appellee
Tom Martin
Appellee
Jarrett Price
Appellee
James Singleton
Appellee
Sol David Wagner
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6155

MARCUS DANIEL ALLISON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

TOM MARTIN, County of Oconee SC by Atty; DEPUTY SOL DAVID 

WAGNER, Oconee Co; CHIEF PUBLIC DEFENDER WILSON BURR, Oconee 

Co; CORPORAL JARRETT PRICE, O.C.S.O.; SERGEANT CASEY 

BOWLING, O.C.S.O.; JAMES SINGLETON, Retired Sheriff, 

O.C.S.O.; ELIZABETH HOLCOMB, M.D. Lieber Correctional 

Institution; jointly, individually and in their official 

capacities,

Defendants - Appellees,

and

JOHN DOE, a/k/a Sheriff, O.C.S.O.; RON DOE, jointly; DON 

DOE, jointly, individually and in their official capacities,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Aiken. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(1:14-cv-00668-RBH)

Submitted: May 21, 2015 Decided: May 27, 2015

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Appeal: 15-6155 Doc: 16 Filed: 05/27/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

Marcus Daniel Allison, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6155 Doc: 16 Filed: 05/27/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

PER CURIAM:

Marcus Daniel Allison appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

relief on Allison’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. Allison 

also appeals the district court’s subsequent text order denying 

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated 

by the district court. Allison v. Martin, No. 1:14-cv-00668-RBH 

(D.S.C. Nov. 24, 2014; Dec. 19, 2014). We further deny 

Allison’s motion to appoint counsel and deny as unnecessary his 

motion for a certificate of appealability. 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

Appeal: 15-6155 Doc: 16 Filed: 05/27/2015 Pg: 3 of 3