U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1999

Bynum v. Peterson

Bynum v. Peterson
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided August 10, 1999

Bynum v. Peterson

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-1756

ANNETTE BYNUM, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

D. L. PETERSON, Deputy Sheriff; T. S. O’NEAL, Deputy Sheriff; DEPUTY SHERIFF STANLEY, Defendants - Appellees, and

PITT COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT; JOHNNY PORTER; GERALDINE PORTER, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, Dis- trict Judge. (CA-97-229-4-H)

Submitted: August 5, 1999 Decided: August 10, 1999

Before MURNAGHAN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Annette Bynum, Appellant Pro Se. Timothy Coleman Barber, BARBER & ASSOCIATES, Greenville, North Carolina; JoAnne Keeler Burgdorff, PITT COUNTY LEGAL DEPARTMENT, Greenville, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Annette Bynum appeals the district court’s order and judgment granting summary judgment to the Appellees and dismissing her civil rights complaint alleging that excessive force was used to effec- tuate her arrest. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Bynum v. Pitt County Sheriff Dep’t, No. CA-97-229-4-H (E.D.N.C. Apr. 29, 1999). We dis- pense 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.

AFFIRMED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.