Hinson-Bey v. City of Albermarle Police Department

676 F. App'x 220
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 21, 2017
DocketNo. 16-2148
StatusPublished

This text of 676 F. App'x 220 (Hinson-Bey v. City of Albermarle Police Department) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hinson-Bey v. City of Albermarle Police Department, 676 F. App'x 220 (4th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

[221]*221Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedént in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mervin Hinson-Bey appeals the district court’s order dismissing with prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) civil rights action for failure to state a claim. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Hinson-Bey’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Hinson-Bey has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 430 n.4 (4th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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

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

Related

Williams v. Giant Food Inc.
370 F.3d 423 (Fourth Circuit, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
676 F. App'x 220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinson-bey-v-city-of-albermarle-police-department-ca4-2017.