Filed: Mar. 19, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6149 CHARLES GOODE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Intake and Legal Services, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-891-2) Submitted: March 11, 2004 Decided: March 19, 2004 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6149 CHARLES GOODE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Intake and Legal Services, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-891-2) Submitted: March 11, 2004 Decided: March 19, 2004 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpub..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6149 CHARLES GOODE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Intake and Legal Services, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-891-2) Submitted: March 11, 2004 Decided: March 19, 2004 Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Charles Goode, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Charles Goode appeals the district court’s order dismissing his petition for writ of mandamus for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as frivolous for the reasons stated by the district court. See Goode v. Angelone, No. CA-03-891-2 (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 5, 2004; entered Jan. 6, 2004). 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. DISMISSED - 2 -
