Perry-Bey v. Jasinowski

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 21, 2006
Docket05-2101
StatusUnpublished

This text of Perry-Bey v. Jasinowski (Perry-Bey v. Jasinowski) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Perry-Bey v. Jasinowski, (4th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-2101

ROY L. PERRY-BEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

LIEUTENANT J. R. JASINOWSKI, Virginia State Police; W. RABORGE, Virginia State Police; S. WALKER, Officer, Portsmouth Police Department; F. D. DAVIS, Magistrate, Fourth Judicial District; PATRICIA H. O'BOYLE, Commonwealth Attorney's Office; KARIN HORWATT, Commonwealth Attorney's Office; THE HONORABLE PAUL FRAIM, Mayor, City of Norfolk; HAROLD P. JUREN, ESQUIRE, Chief Deputy City Attorney,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Walter D. Kelley, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-509-2)

Submitted: February 16, 2006 Decided: February 21, 2006

Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roy L. Perry-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. James Christian Stuchell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Alfred William Bates, III, CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Portsmouth, Virginia; Jeff Wayne Rosen, PENDER & COWARD, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia; Melvin Wayne Ringer, CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

- 2 - PER CURIAM:

Roy L. Perry-Bey appeals the district court’s judgment

adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendations and dismissing

Perry-Bey’s civil rights complaint. We have reviewed the report

and recommendation, the district court’s order and the record and

affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. See Perry-

Bey v. Jasinowski, No. CA-04-509-2 (E.D. Va. filed Sept. 20, 2005;

entered Sept. 21, 2005). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

- 3 -

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Perry-Bey v. Jasinowski, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perry-bey-v-jasinowski-ca4-2006.