Filed: May 15, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6132 KOREY JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LEROY FRANCIS MILLETTE, JR., Circuit Court Judge; M. ELIZABETH MILLETTE, Commonwealth Attorney, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cv-00015-RAJ-TE) Submitted: May 10, 2007 Decided: May 15, 2007 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Sen
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6132 KOREY JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LEROY FRANCIS MILLETTE, JR., Circuit Court Judge; M. ELIZABETH MILLETTE, Commonwealth Attorney, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cv-00015-RAJ-TE) Submitted: May 10, 2007 Decided: May 15, 2007 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Seni..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6132 KOREY JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LEROY FRANCIS MILLETTE, JR., Circuit Court Judge; M. ELIZABETH MILLETTE, Commonwealth Attorney, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District Judge. (2:07-cv-00015-RAJ-TE) Submitted: May 10, 2007 Decided: May 15, 2007 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Korey Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Korey Johnson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss for the reasons stated by the district court. Johnson v. Millette, No. 2:07-cv-00015-RAJ-TE (E.D. Va. Jan. 18, 2007). 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 -
