Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Kindley v. Moore, 02-6897 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 02-6897 Visitors: 17
Filed: Sep. 10, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6897 JESSIE BENJAMIN KINDLEY, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MR. MOORE, Counselor; J.V. BEALE, Warden; WAYNE BROWN, Assistant Warden of Operations; MRS. JOYNER, Business Manager; MR. WRIGHT, Assistant at Warden of Programs; MR. ROSE, Assistant at Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-3
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6897 JESSIE BENJAMIN KINDLEY, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MR. MOORE, Counselor; J.V. BEALE, Warden; WAYNE BROWN, Assistant Warden of Operations; MRS. JOYNER, Business Manager; MR. WRIGHT, Assistant at Warden of Programs; MR. ROSE, Assistant at Warden, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-366-2) Submitted: September 5, 2002 Decided: September 10, 2002 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jessie Benjamin Kindley, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Jessie Benjamin Kindley, Sr., a Virginia inmate, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we deny Kindley’s motion to present interrogatories, deny his motion for production of documents, and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Kindley v. Moore, No. CA-02-366-2 (E.D. Va. May 30, 2002). 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