The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
02-7119•Alfred Wayne Finnell v. Commonwealth of Virginia
02-7119Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitOct 21, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7119
ALFRED WAYNE FINNELL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; JUVENILE & DOMESTIC
RELATIONS COURT, Nineteenth Judicial District,
Fairfax County, Virginia,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District
Judge. (CA-02-664-AM)
Submitted: October 10, 2002 Decided: October 21, 2002
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Alfred Wayne Finnell, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Alfred Wayne Finnell appeals the district court’s order
summarily dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. We have
reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no
reversible error. Insofar as Finnell is attempting to challenge his
federal conviction, we find it barred by the rule announced in Heck
v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). We also find the action barred by
the statute of limitations. Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261 (1985).
Accordingly, we affirm. 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
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.