Chante' Hodge v. Randy Stephens, No. 13-1419 (4th Cir. 2013)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1419 CHANTà N. HODGE; HAROLD H. HODGE, JR., Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. LIEUTENANT RANDY L. STEPHENS, individual and government capacity; SEARGENT MERKELSON, (MSP), individual and government capacity; SEARGENT BEACH, individual and government capacity; CORPORAL COSTELLA, individual and government capacity; MARYLAND STATE POLICE; CALVERT COUNTY SHERIFF OFFICE; SHERIFF MIKE EVANS, individual and government capacity; DEPUTY SHERIFF E. BOWEN, individual and government capacity; DEPUTY SHERIFF FOX, individual and government capacity; CALVERT COUNTY, local government; STATE OF MARYLAND, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:12-cv-01988-AW) Submitted: July 18, 2013 Decided: July 22, 2013 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Chanté N. Hodge, Harold H. Hodge, Jr., Appellants Pro Se. Nichole Cherie Gatewood, Phillip M. Pickus, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Pikesville, Maryland; John Francis Breads, Jr., Appellees. Matthew Douglas Peter, Hanover, Maryland, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Chante N. Hodge and Harold H. Hodge, Jr., appeal the district court s orders denying relief on their civil action and denying their motion for reconsideration. record and find no reversible error. We have reviewed the Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. No. 8:12-cv-01988-AW We dispense with contentions are (D. Md. oral Jan. argument adequately 31 because presented in Hodge v. Stephens, & Mar. 22, 2013). the facts and the materials legal before this 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.