James Crangle v. Eastern Regional Jail

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000054808-2]; denying Motion for other relief [1000031578-2], denying Motion for other relief [1000031573-3] Originating case number: 3:16-cv-00122-RWT Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000106085]. Mailed to: James Crangle. [17-6146]

Appeal: 17-6146

Doc: 24

Filed: 06/23/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6146

JAMES CRANGLE; TARA ROSE ALLEN ROONEY-CRANGLE,
Petitioners - Appellants,
v.
EASTERN REGIONAL JAIL,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia,
at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, Chief District Judge. (3:16-cv-00122-RWT)

Submitted: June 20, 2017

Decided: June 23, 2017

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

J.K. Crangle, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Young, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 17-6146

Doc: 24

Filed: 06/23/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Appellants James Crangle and his wife, Tara Rose Allen Rooney-Crangle, appeal
the district court’s order dismissing their civil action for failure to comply with the
court’s prior order directing them to complete and submit court-approved forms. On
appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R.
34(b). Because Appellants’ informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district
court’s disposition, Appellants forfeited appellate review of the court’s order.

See

Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly,
although we grant leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, we affirm the district
court’s judgment. We deny the pending motions for a writ of certiorari and for an
extraordinary writ.

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