Furtado v. Montgomery County, Maryland

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6194

EDSON FURTADO,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND; MONTGOMERY COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:07-cv-02755-RDB)

Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 30, 2008

Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edson Furtado, Appellant Pro Se. Edward Barry Lattner, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Edson Furtado appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

Furtado’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm for the

reasons stated by the district court. Furtado v. Montgomery

County, Md., No. 1:07-cv-02755-RDB (D. Md. filed Jan. 14, 2008 &

entered Jan. 16, 2008). We dispense 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

- 2 -