Montelis Peters v. Rob Caplan


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:14-cv-00955-GJH. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000002462].. [16-1475]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-1475 Doc: 33 Filed: 01/12/2017 Pg: 1 of 4 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1475 MONTELIS PETERS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CORPORAL ROB CAPLAN, Badge No. 122; CITY OF MOUNT RAINIER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. George J. Hazel, District Judge. (8:14-cv-00955-GJH) Submitted: November 30, 2016 Decided: January 12, 2017 Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Christopher Belcher, Oxon Hill, Maryland, for Appellant. John F. Breads, Jr., LOCAL GOVERNMENT INSURANCE TRUST, Hanover, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-1475 Doc: 33 Filed: 01/12/2017 Pg: 2 of 4 PER CURIAM: Montelis Peters sued the City of Mount Rainier, Maryland, and Corporal Rob Caplan under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) and the Maryland complaint Declaration alleged arrested Peters. of that Rights the Articles City and 24 and Corporal 26. Caplan The falsely The district court dismissed the case. Peters now appeals the district court’s orders dismissing the § 1983 claim against the City and granting summary judgment to Corporal Caplan on the § 1983 and Maryland claims. Finding no error, we affirm. First, we review de novo the summary judgment to Corporal Caplan. district court’s grant of See Core Commc’ns, Inc. v. Verizon Md. LLC, 744 F.3d 310, 320 (4th Cir. 2014). A court may award summary judgment only when no genuine dispute of material fact remains and the record shows that entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Peters challenges the district the moving party is Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). court’s grant of summary judgment to Corporal Caplan on three grounds, alleging that the court erred (1) by resolving disputed issues of material fact in Corporal Caplan’s favor; (2) by ruling that Corporal Caplan had probable cause to arrest Peters; and (3) by holding that Corporal Caplan’s statement of probable cause was not materially misleading. 2 Appeal: 16-1475 Doc: 33 We Filed: 01/12/2017 conclude that the Pg: 3 of 4 district court did resolve disputed issues of material fact. not improperly Peters’ arguments speculate about the meaning of evidence and fail to create a dispute of material fact that is genuine. The district court also properly ruled that Corporal Caplan had probable cause to arrest Peters. district court’s finding that The record supports the the police conducted an investigative stop, not an arrest, when they stopped Peters. See United States v. Elston, 479 F.3d 314, 319-20 (4th Cir. 2007) (requiring police to curtail suspect’s freedom to degree of formal arrest to transform mere stop into an arrest). agree with conducted the the district stop, court that identifying a the officers reasonable suspicion that Peters had committed a crime. We properly articulable See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). Second, we perceive no error in the district court’s conclusion that Corporal Caplan’s statement of probable cause was not materially false or misleading. See Miller v. Prince George’s Cty., 475 F.3d 621, 628 (4th Cir. 2007). Thus, civil liability could not attach to Corporal Caplan, and the district court properly granted him summary judgment. Finally, against the municipality, we turn City. a to the To state plaintiff dismissal must 3 a of § 1983 allege that the § 1983 claim the claim against a municipality Appeal: 16-1475 Doc: 33 Filed: 01/12/2017 Pg: 4 of 4 deprived or caused an official to deprive the plaintiff of a constitutional right through an official policy or custom. See Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978). As discussed above, Peters has failed to allege a deprivation of constitutional right, so his claim against the City must fail as well. See City of Los Angeles v. Heller, 475 U.S. 796, 799 (1986) (holding that municipal liability under § 1983 requires a finding of constitutional injury as a prerequisite). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s rulings. dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 4

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?