Filed: Jul. 23, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6749 OVELL T. BARBER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARC JACOBSON, Judge, Norfolk Circuit Court; MICHAEL T. JUDGE, Assistant Attorney General, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-195-2) Submitted: July 15, 2004 Decided: July 23, 2004 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by un
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6749 OVELL T. BARBER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARC JACOBSON, Judge, Norfolk Circuit Court; MICHAEL T. JUDGE, Assistant Attorney General, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-195-2) Submitted: July 15, 2004 Decided: July 23, 2004 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unp..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6749 OVELL T. BARBER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MARC JACOBSON, Judge, Norfolk Circuit Court; MICHAEL T. JUDGE, Assistant Attorney General, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-195-2) Submitted: July 15, 2004 Decided: July 23, 2004 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ovell T. Barber, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ovell T. Barber appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Barber v. Jacobson, No. CA-04-195-2 (E.D. Va. Apr. 16, 2004). We deny Barber’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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 -
