Anthony King v. Chris Brown

93 F. App'x 102
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedApril 13, 2004
Docket03-2754
StatusUnpublished

This text of 93 F. App'x 102 (Anthony King v. Chris Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anthony King v. Chris Brown, 93 F. App'x 102 (8th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Anthony King appeals the district court’s * adverse judgment following a jury trial on King’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 excessive-force claim. King contends appellee and defense witnesses committed perjury at trial, and his appointed counsel was derelict in her duties. We reject King’s arguments because the jury was entitled to credit the testimony of witnesses, see United States v. Harris, 310 F.3d 1105, 1111 (8th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1052, 123 S.Ct. 2121, 155 L.Ed.2d 1096 (2003); and there is no constitutional or statutory right to effective assistance of counsel in a civil case, see Glide v. Henderson, 855 F.2d 536, 541 (8th Cir.1988).

We thus affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

*

The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Quintanilla-Alcantara v. United States
538 U.S. 1052 (Supreme Court, 2003)
Dennis Glick v. Dr. F.M. Henderson
855 F.2d 536 (Eighth Circuit, 1988)
United States v. Jermaine Harris
310 F.3d 1105 (Eighth Circuit, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
93 F. App'x 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anthony-king-v-chris-brown-ca8-2004.