Court Opinion

ID: 9831350
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:00:59.885483+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:33.808182
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1166      Doc: 12         Filed: 08/31/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1166

        ETHELBERT T.F. JOHNSON,

                            Plaintiff - Appellant,

                     v.

        COMMONWEALTH OF VA,

                            Defendant - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:22-cv-00219-AWA-DEM)

        Submitted: August 29, 2023                                        Decided: August 31, 2023

        Before KING, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Ethelbert T.F. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1166         Doc: 12       Filed: 08/31/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Ethelbert T.F. Johnson appeals the district court’s order dismissing his civil action

        in which he sought to challenge a prior state court decision. On appeal, we confine our

        review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Johnson’s

        informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has

        forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177

        (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules,

        our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district

        court’s judgment. Johnson v. Virginia, No. 2:22-cv-00219-AWA-DEM (E.D. Va. Jan. 30,

        2023). We 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

                                                      2