Bowler v. Young

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6970

JOSEPH BOWLER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

S. K. YOUNG, Warden; A. P. HARVEY, Operations,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-800)

Submitted: March 3, 2003 Decided: March 12, 2003

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Bowler, Appellant Pro Se. Pamela Anne Sargent, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Joseph Bowler appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Bowler v. Young, No. CA-

01-800 (W.D. Va. June 12, 2002). We also deny Bowler’s motion for

appointment of counsel. 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