# Brown v. US Attorney's Office

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · January 9, 2007

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1021515

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** January 9, 2007
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1021515

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7320

JOHNNY M. BROWN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Washington,
D.C., Individually and in their official
capacities; JEAN B. HUDSON, Assistant United
States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia,
Individually and in their official capacities,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior
District Judge. (1:06-cv-00582-CMH)

Submitted: December 20, 2006 Decided: January 9, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Johnny M. Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Johnny M. Brown appeals the district court’s order

dismissing this action brought pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims

Act. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss

the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. Brown v.

United States Attorney’s Office, No. 1:06-cv-00582-CMH (E.D. Va.,

filed July 10, 2006; entered July 11, 2006). We deny the motion

for appointment of counsel and 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.*

DISMISSED

*
The district court incorrectly identified Brown as a Virginia
state prisoner. Brown is a federal prisoner who must challenge his
conviction and sentence in a motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2255 (2000). The district court is directed to issue an amended
order reflecting these corrections.

- 2 -

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1021515. Public record. Not legal advice.