No he didn't. And that's all he did then he still wouldn't be able to get experience credit from the state for it, either. He didn't research any part of the subjects other attributes, he didn't perform any sort of market analysis, he didn't research any comps, he didn't drive any comps, didn't make any adjustments, didn't reconcile anything or write anything up in the appraisal report.
He didn't develop any opinions and conclusions that you could have used in your appraisal assignment. Even if he did express an opinion about the quality or condition you would still have had to develop your own opinions in order to compare this property to any of the comps (where you did exactly the same thing WRT developing your opinions and conclusions about them). Same as if you were reviewing another appraiser's work and deciding whether or not you agreed with all or part of the opinions and conclusions therein.
I know you wish it was otherwise, but it is what it is. If you ran into someone defending him who was competent they would run every one of your arguments on this directly into the dirt. You have a way stronger argument with them doing inspections without an inspection license. That argument has the benefit of at least not being based on an outright lie. His advocate wouldn't be able to rebut that allegation.