Case ID: f-appx_45/html/0285-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bernard M. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Eddie Lee PEARSON, Chief Warden, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 02-7037.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 29, 2002.
    Decided Sept. 9, 2002.
    Bernard M. Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Bernard M. Williams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2002) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Williams v. Pearson, No. CA-01-288 (E.D.Va. July 1, 2002). Williams’ motions for appointment of counsel and for oral argument are denied. 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.