Wesley Bethea v. David Ellis, No. 17-2065 (4th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-2065 WESLEY LEON BETHEA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DETECTIVE DAVID CHAD ELLIS; DETECTIVE JASON CORPREW; OFFICER JESSE EMORY; SERGEANT REGINALD BRANCH; OFFICER NORMA RUIZ; DETECTIVE DAVID STANCIL; OFFICER DAVID SEAGROVES; OFFICER RUSSELL WINSTEAD; SERGEANT STEVE STROUD; WILSON POLICE DEPARTMENT; CITY OF WILSON; C. BRUCE ROSE, Mayor of the City of Wilson; THOMAS P. HOPKINS, Police Chief, City of Wilson, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:16-cv-00178-D) Submitted: February 15, 2018 Decided: February 16, 2018 Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wesley Leon Bethea, Appellant Pro Se. James P. Cauley III, Gabriel Du Sablon, CAULEY PRIDGEN, PA, Wilson, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wesley Leon Bethea appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants on his claim for malicious prosecution. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Bethea’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, namely that the false statements at issue were not material to the determination of probable cause, Bethea 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 grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.