Timothy E. Miller appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Miller’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Miller v. DeMarino, No. CA-01-183-1 (N.D.W.Va. Apr. 24, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately *293 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.