Case Name: Terell MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Adam CROUSE, Sergeant, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; David D. Mills, Captain, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Gary S. Moore, Evidence Manager/Supervisor, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Henry S. Caudill, Sheriff, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Tazewell County, Municipality, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-10-24
Citations: 585 F. App'x 113
Docket Number: No. 14-6737
Parties: Terell MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Adam CROUSE, Sergeant, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; David D. Mills, Captain, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Gary S. Moore, Evidence Manager/Supervisor, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Henry S. Caudill, Sheriff, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Tazewell County, Municipality, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 585
Pages: 113–113

Head Matter:
Terell MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Adam CROUSE, Sergeant, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; David D. Mills, Captain, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Gary S. Moore, Evidence Manager/Supervisor, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Henry S. Caudill, Sheriff, Tazewell County Sheriff's Office; Tazewell County, Municipality, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-6737.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 21, 2014.
Decided: Oct. 24, 2014.
Terell Moore, Appellant Pro Se.
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Terell Moore appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Moore v. Crouse, No. 7:14-cv-00043-JPJ-RSB (W.D.Va. Apr. 14, 2014). We deny Moore's motion for the 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.