Filed: Aug. 05, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7417 WALTER VILLEDA, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND; KURT K. GODFREY, Detective #1494, Defendants - Appellees. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Movant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 01-2566-DKC) Submitted: June 23, 2003 Decided: August 5, 2003 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirme
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7417 WALTER VILLEDA, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND; KURT K. GODFREY, Detective #1494, Defendants - Appellees. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Movant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 01-2566-DKC) Submitted: June 23, 2003 Decided: August 5, 2003 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7417 WALTER VILLEDA, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND; KURT K. GODFREY, Detective #1494, Defendants - Appellees. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Movant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA- 01-2566-DKC) Submitted: June 23, 2003 Decided: August 5, 2003 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry A. Escoto, BALDWIN, MOLINA & ESCOTO, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Shalisha H. Ivy, Associate County Attorney, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Walter Villeda appeals the district court’s order awarding Prince George’s County and Detective Godfrey summary judgment in his civil action, in which he alleged Fourth Amendment and pendent state law claims in regard to his arrest by Godfrey. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Villeda v. Prince George’s County, No. CA-01-2566-DKC (D. Md. Aug. 29, 2002). 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