The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
03-7402•Shameke Walker v. MARSHALL PITTS, Lieutenant, Broad River Correctional Institution
03-7402Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 26, 2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7402
SHAMEKE WALKER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
MARSHALL PITTS, Lieutenant, Broad River
Correctional Institution; HERMAN WRIGHT,
Sergeant; WILLIAM CAMLIN; LLOYD B. JACKSON,
Officer,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
C. J. CEPAK, Warden; JOHN MAXCY, Major; PERCY
JONES, Captain,
Defendants,
JACK M. CLARKE,
Party in Interest.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (CA-01-3173-17-6)
Submitted: January 30, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
-- 1 of 3 --
- 2 -
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Shameke Walker, Appellant Pro Se. William Elvin Hopkins, Jr.,
William James Johnson, MCCUTCHEN, BLANTON, JOHNSON & BARNETTE,
L.L.P., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 2 of 3 --
- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Shameke Walker appeals the district court’s order
entering judgment for Defendants in accordance with the jury’s
verdict in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action alleging the
excessive use of force. We have reviewed the record and other
materials before us and find no reversible error. The parties’
versions of events were contradictory. We will not disturb the
jury’s credibility determination in favor of the Defendants, nor
will we weigh the evidence anew. Accordingly, we affirm. 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 of 3 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.