Filed: Dec. 23, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2151 LEO L. PAYNE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. S. RANDOLPH SENGEL, Chief Commonwealth Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia; STEVEN ESCOBAR, Police Officer, Alexandria Police Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (3:12-cv-00852-JRS) Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013 Before SHEDD, DAVIS
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2151 LEO L. PAYNE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. S. RANDOLPH SENGEL, Chief Commonwealth Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia; STEVEN ESCOBAR, Police Officer, Alexandria Police Department, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (3:12-cv-00852-JRS) Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013 Before SHEDD, DAVIS,..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-2151
LEO L. PAYNE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
S. RANDOLPH SENGEL, Chief Commonwealth Attorney, Alexandria,
Virginia; STEVEN ESCOBAR, Police Officer, Alexandria Police
Department,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District
Judge. (3:12-cv-00852-JRS)
Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013
Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leo Lionel Payne, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Leo Lionel Payne appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in
forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by
the district court. Payne v. Sengel, No. 3:12-cv-00852-JRS
(E.D. Va. Sept. 4, 2013). We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2