Frankie LordMaster v. Keith Epp

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for other relief [999665716-2], denying Motion for other relief [999665713-2], denying Motion for other relief [999665710-2], denying Motion for other relief [999665702-2], denying Motion for other relief [999665696-2], denying Motion for other relief [999665691-2], denying Motion for other relief [999658482-2], denying Motion for other relief [999658476-2] Originating case number: 1:14-cv-01351-JCC-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999684699]. Mailed to: Frankie Lordmaster. [15-6917]

Appeal: 15-6917

Doc: 32

Filed: 10/23/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6917

FRANKIE JAE
Goldader,

LORDMASTER,

formerly

known

as

Jason

Robert

Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
KEITH
EPPS,
Fredericksburg
Com
Reporter
(or)
Freelancestar.com Reporter; MICHAEL HARIMAN, Prosecutor (of
Stafford Circuit Court, VA); JOHN CHAPMAN, Former Patrol
Officer of Dumfries P.O.,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (1:14-cv-01351-JCC-JFA)

Submitted:

October 20, 2015

Decided:

October 23, 2015

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frankie Jae LordMaster, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6917

Doc: 32

Filed: 10/23/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Frankie Jae LordMaster appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(b) (2012).
reversible error.

We have reviewed the record and find no
Accordingly, we deny LordMaster’s motions for

access of counsel to the original record, for return of the
original record, for consideration of Supreme Court Rule 19, to
stay

judgment,

develop

facts,

to

join

and

we

district court.

appeals
affirm

and

for

parties,

the

reasons

and

to

stated

further
by

the

LordMaster v. Epps, No. 1:14-cv-01351-JCC-JFA

(E.D. Va. May 19, 2015).

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