Case Name: Mike Anthony RICHARDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Captain Jim GRAY, Defendant-Appellee, and City of Marion; City of Marion Police Department; Chief Willie Smith; Marion D. Mullins; Annette Garner, as parent; Dean Brown, as guardian of Marion D. Mullins, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-06-02
Citations: 433 F. App'x 176
Docket Number: No. 10-2374
Parties: Mike Anthony RICHARDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Captain Jim GRAY, Defendant-Appellee, and City of Marion; City of Marion Police Department; Chief Willie Smith; Marion D. Mullins; Annette Garner, as parent; Dean Brown, as guardian of Marion D. Mullins, Defendants.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 433
Pages: 176–177

Head Matter:
Mike Anthony RICHARDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Captain Jim GRAY, Defendant-Appellee, and City of Marion; City of Marion Police Department; Chief Willie Smith; Marion D. Mullins; Annette Garner, as parent; Dean Brown, as guardian of Marion D. Mullins, Defendants.
No. 10-2374.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 24, 2011.
Decided: June 2, 2011.
Mike Anthony Richardson, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Charles Baxter, Richardson, Plowden & Robinson, PA, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina; Michelle Parsons Kelley, Richardson, Plowden & Robinson, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mike Anthony Richardson appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Richardson v. Captain Gray, No. 4:08-cv-03539-RBH, 2010 WL 4809429 (D.S.C. Nov. 19, 2010). We deny Richardson's motions to appoint counsel and for a transcript at government expense and 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.