Case Name: Robert Holland KOON, a/k/a Robert Koon, a/k/a Robert H. Koon, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jean TOAL, Chief Judicial Officer of South Carolina, in her official capacity; Alan Wilson, Chief Solicitor of South Carolina, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-03-02
Citations: 633 F. App'x 596
Docket Number: No. 15-7836
Parties: Robert Holland KOON, a/k/a Robert Koon, a/k/a Robert H. Koon, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jean TOAL, Chief Judicial Officer of South Carolina, in her official capacity; Alan Wilson, Chief Solicitor of South Carolina, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 633
Pages: 596–597

Head Matter:
Robert Holland KOON, a/k/a Robert Koon, a/k/a Robert H. Koon, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jean TOAL, Chief Judicial Officer of South Carolina, in her official capacity; Alan Wilson, Chief Solicitor of South Carolina, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 15-7836.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 25, 2016.
Decided: March 2, 2016.
Robert Holland Koon, Appellant Pro Se.
Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Holland Koon appeals the district court's order accepting the recom mendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we deny Koon's motion for appointment of counsel and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Koon v. Toal, No. 4:15-cv-02944-DCN, 2015 WL 6501087 (D.S.C. Oct. 26, 2015). 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.
DISMISSED.