Case Name: Eugene P. HARRISON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T. BROWN, Sergeant, Detective, Taevor; Robert Burnish, Sergeant; Jerry Kelly, Corporal; Simon Major, Sumter Lee Detention Center President; Jon Ozmint, South Carolina Department of Correction, Defendants-Appellees, and Sumter County Sheriff Department; Sumter Lee Detention Center; SCDC Commissioner; South Carolina Department of Correction, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-04-25
Citations: 471 F. App'x 211
Docket Number: No. 12-1142
Parties: Eugene P. HARRISON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T. BROWN, Sergeant, Detective, Taevor; Robert Burnish, Sergeant; Jerry Kelly, Corporal; Simon Major, Sumter Lee Detention Center President; Jon Ozmint, South Carolina Department of Correction, Defendants-Appellees, and Sumter County Sheriff Department; Sumter Lee Detention Center; SCDC Commissioner; South Carolina Department of Correction, Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 471
Pages: 211–212

Head Matter:
Eugene P. HARRISON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. T. BROWN, Sergeant, Detective, Taevor; Robert Burnish, Sergeant; Jerry Kelly, Corporal; Simon Major, Sumter Lee Detention Center President; Jon Ozmint, South Carolina Department of Correction, Defendants-Appellees, and Sumter County Sheriff Department; Sumter Lee Detention Center; SCDC Commissioner; South Carolina Department of Correction, Defendants.
No. 12-1142.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 19, 2012.
Decided: April 25, 2012.
Eugene P. Harrison, Appellant Pro se. James M. Davis, Jr., Joel Steve Hughes, Davidson & Lindemann, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, Edgar Lloyd Willcox, II, Willcox Buyck & Williams, PA, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Eugene P. Harrison appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Harrison v. Brown, No. 3:10-cv-02642-RMG, 2012 WL 243212 (D.S.C. Jan. 24, 2012). 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.