Filed: Sep. 04, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6603 MARY E. FIELDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMONWEALTH; AARON WIGGINS; ANDRE RIDDICK; JAMES ADKINS; ANTHONY TERRY; MARYLAND STATE POLICE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-110) Submitted: August 28, 2003 Decided: September 4, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAM
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6603 MARY E. FIELDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMONWEALTH; AARON WIGGINS; ANDRE RIDDICK; JAMES ADKINS; ANTHONY TERRY; MARYLAND STATE POLICE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-110) Submitted: August 28, 2003 Decided: September 4, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMI..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6603 MARY E. FIELDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMONWEALTH; AARON WIGGINS; ANDRE RIDDICK; JAMES ADKINS; ANTHONY TERRY; MARYLAND STATE POLICE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-110) Submitted: August 28, 2003 Decided: September 4, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mary E. Fields, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Mary E. Fields appeals the district court’s order dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint without prejudice for failure to pay the initial partial filing fee as ordered. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Fields v. Commonwealth, No. CA-03-110 (E.D. Va. Apr. 8, 2003). 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. AFFIRMED 2
