UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

JAY PETER MONTEROSE,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ALPHONSO HARRISON, individually

and in his official capacity; SEAN

SULLIVAN, individually and in his

official capacity,

Defendants-Appellants,

and

TOWN OF BERWYN HEIGHTS,

No. 99-1240

MARYLAND; THOMAS J. LOVE, former

Mayor of the Town of Berwyn

Heights in his official capacity;

WILLIAM T. ARMISTEAD, JR., Mayor

of the Town of Berwyn Heights in

his official capacity; JAMES F. ARTIS,

SR., Chief of Police of the Town of

Berwyn Heights, Maryland

individually and in his official

capacity,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.

Peter J. Messitte, District Judge.

(CA-98-195-PJM)

Submitted: March 28, 2000

Decided: April 18, 2000
Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge,

HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge, and

Deborah K. CHASANOW, United States District Judge

for the District of Maryland, sitting by designation.

_________________________________________________________________

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Ronald McGlenn Cherry, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE &

BOOTH, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Marcell Solomon,

MARCELL SOLOMON & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

In this interlocutory appeal, Alphonso Harrison and Sean Sullivan,

police officers for the town of Berwyn Heights, Maryland, appeal the

district court's denial of their motion for summary judgment in a civil

action filed by Jay Monterose. Monterose's complaint against Harrison, Sullivan, other public officials, and the town of Berwyn Heights,

stemmed from his arrest following a traffic stop. It alleged various

state and federal claims, including unlawful arrest and excessive

force. See 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). The district court granted summary judgment to all of the defendants but officers Harrison and Sullivan. The court concluded that there were

genuine issues of material fact that precluded summary judgment in

favor of the police officers based upon qualified immunity. Having

 2
previously granted the parties' motion to submit this appeal on the

briefs, we have reviewed the parties' submissions and dismiss the

appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

A district court's interlocutory order denying a defendant's motion

for summary judgment is an appealable collateral order when the

defendant is a public official asserting a qualified immunity defense

and "the issue appealed concern[s], not which facts the parties might

be able to prove, but, rather, whether or not certain given facts

showed a violation of `clearly established' law." Johnson v. Jones,

515 U.S. 304, 311 (1995). Thus, a court's order denying a qualified

immunity defense at summary judgment is appealable if the defendants claim "there was no violation of clearly established law accepting the facts as the district court viewed them." See Winfield v. Bass,

106 F.3d 525, 530 (4th Cir. 1997). However, we have no jurisdiction

over an appeal that requires an assessment of whether or not certain

conduct occurred. See id. We conclude that this is such an appeal and

dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

DISMISSED

 3