Chante' Hodge v. Randy Stephen

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:12-cv-01988-AW. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999155363]. Mailed to: Chante' Hodge and Harold Hodge. [13-1419]

Appeal: 13-1419

Doc: 11

Filed: 07/22/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-1419

CHANTÉ N. HODGE; HAROLD H. HODGE, JR.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
LIEUTENANT RANDY L. STEPHENS, individual and government
capacity;
SEARGENT
MERKELSON,
(MSP),
individual
and
government
capacity;
SEARGENT
BEACH,
individual
and
government capacity; CORPORAL COSTELLA, individual and
government capacity; MARYLAND STATE POLICE; CALVERT COUNTY
SHERIFF
OFFICE;
SHERIFF
MIKE
EVANS,
individual
and
government capacity; DEPUTY SHERIFF E. BOWEN, individual
and government capacity; DEPUTY SHERIFF FOX, individual and
government capacity; CALVERT COUNTY, local government;
STATE OF MARYLAND,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Alexander Williams, Jr., District
Judge. (8:12-cv-01988-AW)

Submitted:

July 18, 2013

Decided: July 22, 2013

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Chanté N. Hodge, Harold H. Hodge, Jr., Appellants Pro Se.
Nichole Cherie Gatewood, Phillip M. Pickus, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Pikesville, Maryland; John Francis

Appeal: 13-1419

Doc: 11

Breads, Jr.,
Appellees.

Filed: 07/22/2013

Matthew

Douglas

Pg: 2 of 3

Peter,

Hanover,

Maryland,

for

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 13-1419

Doc: 11

Filed: 07/22/2013

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Chante’ N. Hodge and Harold H. Hodge, Jr., appeal the
district court’s orders denying relief on their civil action and
denying their motion for reconsideration.
record and find no reversible error.

We have reviewed the

Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court.
No. 8:12-cv-01988-AW
We dispense

with

contentions

are

(D. Md.

oral

Jan.

argument

adequately

31

because

presented

in

Hodge v. Stephens,

&

Mar.

22,

2013).

the

facts

and

the

materials

legal
before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3