Case Name: Donnie Ray WILKINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOT SPRINGS POLICE DEPARTMENT; Garland County Sheriff Department; Federal Bureau of Investigation, in Hot Springs, Arkansas; Does, City Attorneys, Judges in Hot Springs, Arkansas, and the Judges of Arkansas, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-08-03
Citations: 103 F. App'x 927
Docket Number: No. 04-2638
Parties: Donnie Ray WILKINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOT SPRINGS POLICE DEPARTMENT; Garland County Sheriff Department; Federal Bureau of Investigation, in Hot Springs, Arkansas; Does, City Attorneys, Judges in Hot Springs, Arkansas, and the Judges of Arkansas, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 103
Pages: 927–927

Head Matter:
Donnie Ray WILKINSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HOT SPRINGS POLICE DEPARTMENT; Garland County Sheriff Department; Federal Bureau of Investigation, in Hot Springs, Arkansas; Does, City Attorneys, Judges in Hot Springs, Arkansas, and the Judges of Arkansas, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 04-2638.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: July 22, 2004.
Decided: Aug. 3, 2004.
Donnie Ray Wilkinson, Little Rock, AR, pro se.
Before MELLOY, LAY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Donnie Ray Wilkinson brings this pro se appeal challenging the district court's dismissal of his case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). After granting Wilkinson's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, the district court concluded that Wilkinson's complaint was frivolous and dismissed it because it did not allege any basis for the court's jurisdiction or any actionable legal theory and appeared to be an attempt to avoid other court rulings. After de novo review of the record, Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam), we affirm the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).