Case Name: Marsha J. DENNIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK), Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-05-22
Citations: 34 F. App'x 950
Docket Number: No. 02-1270
Parties: Marsha J. DENNIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK), Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 34
Pages: 950–950

Head Matter:
Marsha J. DENNIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK), Defendant-Appellee.
No. 02-1270.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 16, 2002.
Decided May 22, 2002.
Marsha J. Dennis, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Stuart Block, Gilberg & Kiernan, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Marsha Dennis appeals from the district court's order granting summary judgment to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation in this civil action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's orders and find no reversible error. Dennis challenges the grant of summary judgment to Appellee on her malicious prosecution claim that asserted Appellee caused her to be arrested for trespassing. Dennis was not charged with trespassing because Appellee did not seek a warrant for trespassing. Based on these facts there can be no finding of malicious prosecution. In addition, Dennis raises issues for the first time on appeal. Because she has shown no extraordinary circumstances, we decline to consider these issues. See Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993). Finally, Dennis seeks expungement of her criminal record. Expungement of a state criminal record must be sought through the state court system.
Accordingly, we 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.