Lawrence Wilder, Sr. v. Baltimore County Police Depart
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
LAWRENCE VERLINE WILDER, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BALTIMORE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; CHIEF JIM JOHNSON; OFFICER ROBERT LONG; OFFICER DOYLE; OFFICER BUTTONS; OFFICER JACKSON; OFFICER DUNNING; OFFICER COVINGTON; OFFICER THOMPSON; OFFICER MAYBIN; OFFICER SEWELL; OFFICER POWERS; OFFICER SMITH; OFFICER FAIM; OFFICER BRUCE; UNKNOWN OFFICERS AND AGENTS, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:09cv-00299))
July 30, 2009
August 4, 2009
Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lawrence Verline Wilder, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Lawrence against the Verline Wilder, Police Sr., filed a and complaint several
officers, alleging violations of his civil rights.
court entered an order granting Wilder leave to proceed in forma pauperis, denying without prejudice his motion for appointment of counsel, and placing his case on inactive status pending
resolution of cases Wilder has on the court's active docket. Wilder seeks to appeal, challenging the denial of his motion for appointment of counsel. This court may exercise jurisdiction
only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). Because the denial of a motion for
appointment of counsel is not immediately appealable, Miller v. Simmons, 814 F.2d 962, 967 (4th Cir. 1987), we dismiss the
appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
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
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?