Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

M. Rodney Jones appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Jones’ motions for appointment of counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Jones v. South Carolina Dep’t of Corr., No. CA-02-1109-24-3 (D.S.C. filed Dec. 24, 2002 & entered Dec. 26, 2002). We deny Jones’ motion for 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.