Thompson v. Circuit Court of Prince George Co.

Fourth Circuit

Thompson v. Circuit Court of Prince George Co.

478 F. App'x 763

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 13, 2012

DocketNo. 12-1759

StatusPublished

This text of 478 F. App'x 763 (Thompson v. Circuit Court of Prince George Co.) 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

Thompson v. Circuit Court of Prince George Co., 478 F. App'x 763 (4th Cir. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Aaron M. Thompson appeals the district court’s order construing his filing, in which he requests removal of his name from the Maryland sex offender registry and monetary damages, as a petition for writ of mandamus. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Thompson informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we deny Thompson’s motion to remand and affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.

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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Aaron M. Thompson appeals the district court’s order construing his filing, in which he requests removal of his name from the Maryland sex offender registry and monetary damages, as a petition for writ of mandamus. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Thompson informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. Accordingly, we deny Thompson’s motion to remand and affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

478 F. App'x 763, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-circuit-court-of-prince-george-co-ca4-2012.