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)
22-1667•Joshua Omar Brown, a natural man/Moorish American v. State of North Carolina
22-1667Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 22, 2022
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-1667
JOSHUA OMAR BROWN, a natural man/Moorish American,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; MECKLENBURG COUNTY; THE GENERAL
COURT OF JUSTICE, Superior Division; SPENCER B. MERRIWEATHER, III, District
Attorney; W. ROBERT BELL, Senior Resident Judge; ELIZABETH THORTON
TROSCH, Chief District Judge; F. BROWN, Mecklenburg County Magistrate; BELAL
ELRAHAL, Assistant Public Defender,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:21-cv-00461-RJC-DCK)
Submitted: November 17, 2022 Decided: November 22, 2022
Before KING, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joshua Omar Brown, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Joshua Omar Brown appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motion
to dismiss Brown’s complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in
the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Brown’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.
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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.