Douglas Charnock, Jr. v. Commonwealth of Virginia

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to expedite decision [999474553-2] [999474553-3] Originating case number: 2:14-cv-00229-RAJ-LRL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999495872]. Mailed to: appellant. [14-1888]

Appeal: 14-1888

Doc: 14

Filed: 12/18/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1888

DOUGLAS C. CHARNOCK, JR.,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE FREDERICK B.
LOWE,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
Judge. (2:14-cv-00229-RAJ-LRL)

Submitted:

December 16, 2014

Before DUNCAN
Circuit Judge.

and

DIAZ,

Circuit

Decided: December 18, 2014

Judges,

and

DAVIS,

Senior

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Douglas C. Charnock, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Nicholas Foris
Simopoulos, Farnaz Farkish Thompson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-1888

Doc: 14

Filed: 12/18/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Douglas C. Charnock, Jr., appeals the district court’s
order denying his motion for injunctive relief and dismissing
his

complaint.

We

reversible error.

have

(E.D.

Va.

the

record

and

find

no

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court.
RAJ-LRL

reviewed

July

Charnock v. Virginia, No. 2:14-cv-0022929,

motion to expedite as moot.

2014).

We

also

deny

Charnock’s

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