Filed: Jan. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-7099 DAVID WILLIAM CONN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KENNETH E. STOLLE, Sheriff; THOMPSON, Captain; BISHOP, Sergeant; APFEL, Corporal; JAIL STAFF; GLEASON, Deputy Sheriff; FREE, Colonel; SCHUSTER, Chief, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:11-cv-00758-CMH-TCB) Submitted: December 6, 2011 Decided: J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-7099 DAVID WILLIAM CONN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. KENNETH E. STOLLE, Sheriff; THOMPSON, Captain; BISHOP, Sergeant; APFEL, Corporal; JAIL STAFF; GLEASON, Deputy Sheriff; FREE, Colonel; SCHUSTER, Chief, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:11-cv-00758-CMH-TCB) Submitted: December 6, 2011 Decided: Ja..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-7099
DAVID WILLIAM CONN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
KENNETH E. STOLLE, Sheriff; THOMPSON, Captain; BISHOP,
Sergeant; APFEL, Corporal; JAIL STAFF; GLEASON, Deputy
Sheriff; FREE, Colonel; SCHUSTER, Chief,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:11-cv-00758-CMH-TCB)
Submitted: December 6, 2011 Decided: January 5, 2012
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David William Conn, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David William Conn appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(b) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the district court. Conn v. Stolle, Case No. 1:11-cv-00758-
CMH-TCB (E.D. Va. Aug. 2, 2011). 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.
AFFIRMED
2