Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Derek Curtis v. Kenneth Cuccinelli, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    13 views3 pages
    Derek Curtis appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal for the reasons stated in Curtis v. Cuccinelli, No. 1:12-cv-00296-CMH-IDD (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 19 & entered Feb. 21, 2013). The court dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2013-07-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 13-6437

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Derek Curtis appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal for the reasons stated in Curtis v. Cuccinelli, No. 1:12-cv-00296-CMH-IDD (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 19 & entered Feb. 21, 2013). The court dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    13 views3 pages

    Derek Curtis v. Kenneth Cuccinelli, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Derek Curtis appealed the district court's dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the record and found no reversible error. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal for the reasons stated in Curtis v. Cuccinelli, No. 1:12-cv-00296-CMH-IDD (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 19 & entered Feb. 21, 2013). The court dispensed with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 13-6437

    DEREK CURTIS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    KENNETH T. CUCCINELLI, II, Attorney General; PAUL EBERT,
    Esquire, Commonwealth Attorney; JEANICE WEITHOP, Esq. Asst.
    Commonwealth
    Attorney;
    ANGELA
    HORAN,
    County
    Attorney;
    COLONEL
    MELETUS, Superintendent; CHERYL ANN WALTON, CAC;
    CAPTAIN GEORGE HURLOCK, Director of Security; CHARLIE DEAN,
    Chief of Police; HEATHER DARLING, Detective; SERGEANT
    BREWER, Deputy Sheriff; OFFICER PEACEMAKER, Deputy Sheriff;
    CAROLYN OLIVER, Social Worker II; SERGEANT LAUREL WHITAKER,
    Supervisor,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    CHERYL WALTON, Attorney; UNKNOWN CORRECTIONAL OFFICER,
    Prince William County Regional Adult Detention Center;
    BRANT, Correctional Officer; TED BODIE, Attorney,
    Defendants.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    Claude M. Hilton, Senior
    District Judge. (1:12-cv-00296-CMH-IDD)

    Submitted:

    July 18, 2013

    Decided:

    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    July 23, 2013

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Derek Curtis, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Derek

    Curtis

    appeals

    the

    district

    courts

    order

    dismissing his 42 U.S.C. 1983 (2006) complaint under 28 U.S.C.


    1915A(b) (2006).
    reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no


    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    Curtis v. Cuccinelli, No. 1:12-cv-00296-

    CMH-IDD (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 19 & entered Feb. 21, 2013).
    dispense

    with

    contentions

    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    We

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like