U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2013

Chante' Hodge v. Randy Stephens

Chante' Hodge v. Randy Stephens
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 22, 2013

Chante' Hodge v. Randy Stephens

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Breads, Jr., Matthew Douglas Peter, Hanover, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

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. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hodge v. Stephens, No. 8:12-cv-01988-AW (D. Md. Jan. 31 & Mar. 22, 2013).

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

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