Filed: Jul. 28, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6795 CLARENCE CARTER MOORE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:07-cv-00132-JRS) Submitted: July 22, 2008 Decided: July 28, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clarence Carter Moore, App
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6795 CLARENCE CARTER MOORE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:07-cv-00132-JRS) Submitted: July 22, 2008 Decided: July 28, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clarence Carter Moore, Appe..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6795 CLARENCE CARTER MOORE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, Chief District Judge. (3:07-cv-00132-JRS) Submitted: July 22, 2008 Decided: July 28, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clarence Carter Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Clarence Carter Moore appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Moore v. Commonwealth of Va., No. 3:07-cv- 00132-JRS (E.D. Va. Apr. 21, 2008). 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 -
