From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnes v. Whitted

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 7, 2013
520 F. App'x 232 (4th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 12-8164

05-07-2013

MARK ANTHONY BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DAVID WHITTED, Deputy Assistant Commonwealth Attorney; H. K. REVELEY, JR., Private Attorney, Defendants - Appellees

Mark Anthony Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Jeff W. Rosen, PENDER & COWARD, PC, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee David Whitted.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:12-cv-01340-LMB-IDD) Before AGEE, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark Anthony Barnes, Appellant Pro Se. Jeff W. Rosen, PENDER & COWARD, PC, Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellee David Whitted. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Mark Anthony Barnes appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint for failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Barnes v. Whitted, No. 1:12-cv-01340-LMB-IDD (E.D. Va. Nov. 27, 2012). We deny Barnes's motions to appoint counsel, dismiss a party, for production of documents, to hold a settlement conference and to amend a cause of action. Finally, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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


Summaries of

Barnes v. Whitted

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 7, 2013
520 F. App'x 232 (4th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Barnes v. Whitted

Case Details

Full title:MARK ANTHONY BARNES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DAVID WHITTED, Deputy…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 7, 2013

Citations

520 F. App'x 232 (4th Cir. 2013)