Filed: Mar. 02, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7192 STANFORD EL CHRISTOPHER MCPHERSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:09-ct-03145-FL) Submitted: February 24, 2011 Decided: March 2, 2011 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7192 STANFORD EL CHRISTOPHER MCPHERSON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:09-ct-03145-FL) Submitted: February 24, 2011 Decided: March 2, 2011 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per c..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7192
STANFORD EL CHRISTOPHER MCPHERSON, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan,
Chief District Judge. (5:09-ct-03145-FL)
Submitted: February 24, 2011 Decided: March 2, 2011
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stanford El Christopher McPherson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stanford El Christopher McPherson, Jr., appeals the
district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006)
complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2006). We have
reviewed the record and find that this appeal is frivolous.
Accordingly, we deny McPherson’s motion for appointment of
counsel and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the
district court. McPherson v. City of Fayetteville Police Dep’t,
No. 5:09-ct-03145-FL (E.D.N.C. Aug. 16, 2010). 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.
DISMISSED
2