Filed: Sep. 01, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6750 ALLEN R. LAMONT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. SGT. CREWS; CPT. MAURICE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:14-cv-00853-CMH-IDD) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: September 1, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Allen R. Lamont,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6750 ALLEN R. LAMONT, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. SGT. CREWS; CPT. MAURICE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:14-cv-00853-CMH-IDD) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: September 1, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Allen R. Lamont, A..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6750
ALLEN R. LAMONT,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
SGT. CREWS; CPT. MAURICE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:14-cv-00853-CMH-IDD)
Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: September 1, 2015
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Allen R. Lamont, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Hoehl O’Shea, OFFICE
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Allen R. Lamont appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Lamont v. Sgt. Crews, No. 1:14-cv-00853-CMH-IDD (E.D. Va. May 1,
2015). 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.
AFFIRMED
2