Norman Wilkerson v. County of Chesterfield

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for leave to file [999867141-2]; denying Motion for stay pending appeal [999801545-2]; denying Motion for bail/release pending appeal (Local Rule 9(a) and (b)) [999801545-3]; denying Motion to consolidate case (Local Rule 12(b)) [999795650-2]; denying Motion for other relief [999795650-3], denying Motion for other relief [999777532-2] Originating case number: 2:15-cv-00531-RBS-DEM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999913557]. Mailed to: appellant. [16-6269]

Appeal: 16-6269

Doc: 24

Filed: 08/19/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6269

NORMAN KEVIN WILKERSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD; CHESTERFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT;
CHESTERFIELD
COUNTY
COMMONWEALTH
ATTORNEY
OFFICE;
CHESTERFIELD COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE; WILLIAM DAVENPORT,
Commonwealth
Attorney;
THOMAS
MCKENNA,
Assistant
Commonwealth Attorney; LURA KHAWAYA, Prosecution Attorney;
BARBARA
COOKE,
Assistant
Commonwealth
Attorney;
CHRIS
HUMPHRIES, Detective; THOMAS KLINE, Detective; SHANNON L.
TAYLOR; THIERRY DUPUS, Chief of the Chesterfield County
Police Department; TIMOTHY RING, Captain of the Chesterfield
County Police Department; RUBEN GREEN; RYAN SPELTZ; JAMES
BODIE; STEVEN L. MICAS, Chesterfield County Attorney,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
District Judge. (2:15-cv-00531-RBS-DEM)

Submitted:

July 27, 2016

Decided:

August 19, 2016

Before KEENAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Appeal: 16-6269

Doc: 24

Filed: 08/19/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

Norman Kevin Wilkerson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-6269

Doc: 24

Filed: 08/19/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Norman Kevin Wilkerson appeals the district court’s orders
dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(b) (2012) and denying his motion for reconsideration.
We

have

reviewed

the

record

and

find

no

reversible

error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court.

See

Wilkerson

v.

Cty.

No.

2:15-cv-

00531-RBS-DEM (E.D. Va. Feb. 23, 2016; Jan. 28, 2016).

We deny

Wilkerson’s pending motions.

of

Chesterfield,

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

3