Harold Hodge, Jr. v. Board of County Commissioner, No. 10-2290 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2290 HAROLD H. HODGE, JR., Plaintiff Appellant, v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; BARBARA STINNETT, Commissioner, in her individual capacity and official capacity; LINDA KELLEY, Commissioner, in her individual capacity and official capacity; WILSON PARRAN, Commissioner, in his individual capacity and official capacity; ROBERT B. RIDDLE, Judge, in his individual capacity and official capacity; C. BUCKIE DOWELL, in his individual capacity and official capacity; JAMES CARPENTER, in his individual capacity and official capacity; STATE OF MARYLAND; SMILEY, Police Officer, in his individual capacity and official capacity; JOHN DOE 1-2, Unknown police officers, in their individual capacity and official capacity; CALVERT COUNTY (local government); GERALD CLARK, Commissioner, in his individual capacity and official capacity also known as Jerry, Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:10cv-02396-RWT) Submitted: February 28, 2011 Decided: March 4, 2011 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harold H. Hodge, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Harold H. Hodge, Jr., appeals the district court s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2006) for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. record and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Hodge v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm rs, No. 8:10-cv-02396-RWT (D. Md. filed Oct. 14, 2010 & entered Oct. 15, 2010). 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 3
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.
