¶1 Ricky M. Watson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2001) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Watson v. Roberts, No. CA-01-14-2 (E.D. Va. filed Dec. 18, 2001; entered Dec. 19, 2001). We deny Watson’s motion for appointment of counsel. We further deny Watson’s motion for general relief, in which he seeks to compel testimony from one of the physicians who treated him. 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.
¶2 AFFIRMED.