Filed: Dec. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6904 DERRELL JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. C.T. WOODY, JR., Sheriff, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-00708-CMH-JFA) Submitted: November 29, 2018 Decided: December 4, 2018 Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Derrell Johnson, Appella
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6904 DERRELL JOHNSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. C.T. WOODY, JR., Sheriff, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-00708-CMH-JFA) Submitted: November 29, 2018 Decided: December 4, 2018 Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Derrell Johnson, Appellan..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-6904
DERRELL JOHNSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
C.T. WOODY, JR., Sheriff,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-00708-CMH-JFA)
Submitted: November 29, 2018 Decided: December 4, 2018
Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Derrell Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Derrell Johnson appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint for failure to comply with a court order. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. Johnson v. Woody, No. 1:17-cv-00708-CMH-JFA (E.D. Va.
July 2, 2018). 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