Martin v. Broad River Corr. Institution

Fourth Circuit

Martin v. Broad River Corr. Institution

568 F. App'x 216

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 23, 2014·No. No. 14-6121·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Alfred Donnie Martin, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v. Broad River Corr. Inst., No. 2:13-cv-01510-TMC (D.S.C. Nov. 19, 2013; Jan. [217]*21717, 2014). We deny Martin’s motion 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Alfred Donnie Martin, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v. Broad River Corr. Inst., No. 2:13-cv-01510-TMC (D.S.C. Nov. 19, 2013; Jan. [217]*21717, 2014). We deny Martin’s motion 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.

Martin v. Broad River Corr. Institution, 568 F. App'x 216 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

568 F. App'x 216 (Martin v. Broad River Corr. Institution) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related