Filed: May 09, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2048 CRAIG BOWERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WAYNE MONTGOMERY; REGINALD MILLER, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-00-3380-3-19) Submitted: February 26, 2002 Decided: May 9, 2002 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2048 CRAIG BOWERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WAYNE MONTGOMERY; REGINALD MILLER, Sergeant, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge. (CA-00-3380-3-19) Submitted: February 26, 2002 Decided: May 9, 2002 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-2048
CRAIG BOWERS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
WAYNE MONTGOMERY; REGINALD MILLER, Sergeant,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
(CA-00-3380-3-19)
Submitted: February 26, 2002 Decided: May 9, 2002
Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Wm. Gary White, III, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.
Donna Seegars Givens, Darra James Vallini, WOODS & GIVENS, L.L.P.,
Lexington, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Craig Bowers appeals the district court’s order granting
summary judgment in favor of Wayne Montgomery in this action filed
under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001).* We have reviewed the
parties’ briefs, the joint appendix, and the district court’s
opinion and find that Bowers’ conduct was not protected by the
First Amendment and there was probable cause to arrest.
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
*
Bowers also named Sergeant Reginald Miller as a defendant,
but does not challenge on appeal the district court’s grant of
summary judgment in Miller’s favor. Nor does Bowers appear to
challenge the dismissal of his state law claim of false arrest. We
therefore find that he has abandoned these claims on appeal.
Pleasurecraft Marine Engine Co. v. Thermo Power Corp.,
272 F.3d
654, 657 (4th Cir. 2001) (noting that issues not raised in opening
brief not preserved for appeal).
2