Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Turner v. FBI, 00-1945 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-1945 Visitors: 61
Filed: Aug. 29, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1945 JOHN PAUL TURNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; VIRGINIA STATE POLICE; U.S. DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY; UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE; AUGUSTA COUNTY SHER- IFF'S DEPARTMENT; UNITED STATES FOREST SER- VICE; INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE; THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; VIRGINIA DE- PARTMENT OF SOCIAL SECURITY; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE;
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1945 JOHN PAUL TURNER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; VIRGINIA STATE POLICE; U.S. DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY; UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE; AUGUSTA COUNTY SHER- IFF'S DEPARTMENT; UNITED STATES FOREST SER- VICE; INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE; THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; VIRGINIA DE- PARTMENT OF SOCIAL SECURITY; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS; UNITED STATES MILITARY; VETERANS ADMINISTRATION; COUNTY OF AUGUSTA; CITY OF STAUNTON, VIRGINIA, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge. (MISC-00-29-7) Submitted: August 24, 2000 Decided: August 29, 2000 Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Paul Turner, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: John Paul Turner appeals the district court’s order finding that he had not complied with a prefiling injunction and denying his motion to proceed in forma pauperis. We have reviewed the rec- ord and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the motion for leave to proceed in forma pau- peris and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Turner v. FBI, No. MISC-00-29-7 (W.D. Va. June 14, 2000). 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. DISMISSED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer