Alonzo Greene v. Durham County Police Dep't, No. 14-6887 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6887 ALONZO GREENE, Plaintiff Appellant, v. DURHAM COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, sued in individual and official capacity; R.C. SWARTZ, Durham County police officer sued in individual and official capacity; JOHN DOE, #1(DPO), Police Investigator, sued in individual and official capacity; JOHN DOE, #2(DPO), Police Investigator, sued in individual and official capacity; JOHN DOE, DPO (Supervisor at scene), sued in individual and official capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:13-cv-00452-CCE-JEP) Submitted: October 16, 2014 Decided: October 22, 2014 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alonzo Greene, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberly Martin Rehberg, CITY ATTORNEY S OFFICE, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alonzo dismissing his Greene 42 appeals U.S.C. the § 1983 district (2012) court s complaint as orders to one defendant and denying his motion to alter or amend judgment. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The orders nor Greene seeks to appeal are neither appealable interlocutory or collateral orders. dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. motion for appointment of counsel. We final orders Accordingly, we We deny Greene s 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. DISMISSED 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.
