Tashawn Thorne v. Officer Wesley ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •                                    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 19-7345
    TASHAWN QWANTREAL THORNE,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    OFFICER WESLEY, Piedmont Correctional Officer; OFFICER SHERWIN,
    Piedmont Regional Jail; OFFICER BOOKER, Piedmont Regional Jail Officer;
    OFFICER MANNS; OFFICER NEWCUM; OFFICER EVANS; OFFICER
    STOKES,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    MS. BOWEN, Mental Health; MS. L. SMITH, Medical Nurse; MRS. SERGEANT
    TISDALE, Grievance Coordinator; MR. TISDALE, Lieutenant; MS. ROBENSON,
    Sergeant; OFFICER WOLFER; MAJOR PEW; CAPTAIN WALKER; OFFICER
    LANGSTON; PIEDMONT REGIONAL JAIL, Private Jail; VIRGINIA,
    Commonwealth of Virginia; RAYMOND RIDLEY, Lieutenant; LANAY
    WALKER, Captain; TERRY SCOTT, Captain; STEVE AGNEW, Major; ROBERT
    PUGH, Major; DONALD HUNTER, Superintendent; CHARLES SAMMUEL, JR.,
    FBOP Director; LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General; DR. MARINO, Doctor
    at Piedmont Regional Jail; MARY T. JONES, Nurse; CAPTAIN SILAS
    BLANTON,
    Defendants.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
    Alexandria. Rossie David Alston, Jr., District Judge. (1:16-cv-00722-RDA-JFA)
    Submitted: September 22, 2020                               Decided: September 24, 2020
    Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Tashawn Qwantreal Thorne, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Tashawn Qwantreal Thorne appeals the district court’s orders denying relief in his
    42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Thorne v. Wesley,
    No. 1:16-cv-00722-RDA-JFA (E.D. Va. filed June 30, 2017, & entered July 3, 2017; Aug.
    27, 2019). We deny Thorne’s motion to appoint counsel 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
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-7345

Filed Date: 9/24/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 9/24/2020