Case Name: David CRAWLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. George M. HINKLE; Gregory Holloway; W.R. Hensley; M.B. Sturgill; S.T. Isbell, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-03-21
Citations: 633 F. App'x 210
Docket Number: No. 15-7511
Parties: David CRAWLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. George M. HINKLE; Gregory Holloway; W.R. Hensley; M.B. Sturgill; S.T. Isbell, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 633
Pages: 210–210

Head Matter:
David CRAWLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. George M. HINKLE; Gregory Holloway; W.R. Hensley; M.B. Sturgill; S.T. Isbell, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-7511.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 17, 2016.
Decided: March 21, 2016.
. David Edward Crawley, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Ap-pellees.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Edward Crawley appeals the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Crawley v. Hinkle, No. 7:14-cv-00300-MFU-JCH, 2015 WL 5026158 (W.D.Va. Aug. 25, 2015). We deny Crawley's motion for appointment of counsel and 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.