Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Patrick Christian v. United States, 17-2445 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 17-2445 Visitors: 18
Filed: Apr. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-2445 PATRICK CHRISTIAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; COMMONWEALTH STATE OF VIRGINIA; CITY OF RICHMOND, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:17-cv-00725-HEH) Submitted: April 19, 2018 Decided: April 23, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 17-2445


PATRICK CHRISTIAN,

                    Plaintiff - Appellant,

             v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;                    COMMONWEALTH             STATE    OF
VIRGINIA; CITY OF RICHMOND,

                    Defendants - Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:17-cv-00725-HEH)


Submitted: April 19, 2018                                         Decided: April 23, 2018


Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Patrick O. Christian, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       Patrick O. Christian appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil rights

complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2012). 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. Christian v. United States,

No. 3:17-cv-00725-HEH (E.D. Va. Dec. 14, 2017). 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

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer