Filed: Aug. 27, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6785 RAYMOND GRIFFIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CAPTAIN STEINBECK, Defendant - Appellee, and DONNIE HARRISON; OFFICER GILLIAM; OFFICER LAMAR; SERGEANT BRIDGES; OFFICER BEY-ADAMS; SERGEANT SMITH; OFFICER HAMMONDS; JOHN AND JANE DOE, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:15-ct-03276-D) Submitted: August 22, 2019 D
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6785 RAYMOND GRIFFIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CAPTAIN STEINBECK, Defendant - Appellee, and DONNIE HARRISON; OFFICER GILLIAM; OFFICER LAMAR; SERGEANT BRIDGES; OFFICER BEY-ADAMS; SERGEANT SMITH; OFFICER HAMMONDS; JOHN AND JANE DOE, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:15-ct-03276-D) Submitted: August 22, 2019 De..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6785
RAYMOND GRIFFIN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CAPTAIN STEINBECK,
Defendant - Appellee,
and
DONNIE HARRISON; OFFICER GILLIAM; OFFICER LAMAR; SERGEANT
BRIDGES; OFFICER BEY-ADAMS; SERGEANT SMITH; OFFICER
HAMMONDS; JOHN AND JANE DOE,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:15-ct-03276-D)
Submitted: August 22, 2019 Decided: August 27, 2019
Before KING and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Raymond Alan Griffin, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Raymond Griffin appeals the district court’s orders granting Defendant’s summary
judgment motion in Griffin’s 42 U.S.C.§ 1983 (2012) action and denying his motion for
reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm the district court’s orders. Griffin v. Steinbeck, No. 5:15-ct-03276-D (E.D.N.C.
Oct. 1, 2018 & May 2, 2019). We deny Griffin’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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
3