Case Name: Joseph P. PNIEWSKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marjorie MARTORELLA, individually and in her official capacity as special prosecutor of Wayne County; Wayne County Commission; West Virginia Prosecuting Attorneys, a state agency, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-04-29
Citations: 324 F. App'x 254
Docket Number: No. 08-2112
Parties: Joseph P. PNIEWSKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marjorie MARTORELLA, individually and in her official capacity as special prosecutor of Wayne County; Wayne County Commission; West Virginia Prosecuting Attorneys, a state agency, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 324
Pages: 254–254

Head Matter:
Joseph P. PNIEWSKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marjorie MARTORELLA, individually and in her official capacity as special prosecutor of Wayne County; Wayne County Commission; West Virginia Prosecuting Attorneys, a state agency, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 08-2112.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 23, 2009.
Decided: April 29, 2009.
Joseph P. Pniewski, Appellant Pro Se. Cheryl Lynne Connelly, Campbell Woods, PLLC, Huntington, West Virginia; Steven Kenneth Nord, Offutt Nord, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Joseph P. Pniewski appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Pniewski v. Martorella, No. 3:04-cv-00354, 2008 WL 4057523 (S.D.W.Va. Aug. 25, 2008). 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.