Filed: Jun. 02, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2374 MIKE ANTHONY RICHARDSON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. CAPTAIN JIM GRAY, Defendant – Appellee, and CITY OF MARION; CITY OF MARION POLICE DEPARTMENT; CHIEF WILLIE SMITH; MARION D. MULLINS; ANNETTE GARNER, as parent; DEAN BROWN, as guardian of Marion D. Mullins, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:08-cv-03539-RBH) Submi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2374 MIKE ANTHONY RICHARDSON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. CAPTAIN JIM GRAY, Defendant – Appellee, and CITY OF MARION; CITY OF MARION POLICE DEPARTMENT; CHIEF WILLIE SMITH; MARION D. MULLINS; ANNETTE GARNER, as parent; DEAN BROWN, as guardian of Marion D. Mullins, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:08-cv-03539-RBH) Submit..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-2374
MIKE ANTHONY RICHARDSON,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
CAPTAIN JIM GRAY,
Defendant – Appellee,
and
CITY OF MARION; CITY OF MARION POLICE DEPARTMENT; CHIEF
WILLIE SMITH; MARION D. MULLINS; ANNETTE GARNER, as parent;
DEAN BROWN, as guardian of Marion D. Mullins,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(4:08-cv-03539-RBH)
Submitted: May 24, 2011 Decided: June 2, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mike Anthony Richardson, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Charles
Baxter, RICHARDSON, PLOWDEN & ROBINSON, PA, Myrtle Beach, South
Carolina; Michelle Parsons Kelley, RICHARDSON, PLOWDEN &
ROBINSON, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Mike Anthony Richardson appeals the district court’s
order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Richardson v. Captain Gray, No. 4:08-cv-03539-RBH
(D.S.C. Nov. 19, 2010). We deny Richardson’s motions to appoint
counsel and for a transcript at government expense 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.
AFFIRMED
3