James Edward Lawrence v. Greenville Police Department

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-7517
JAMES EDWARD LAWRENCE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GREENVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT; JAMES T. BUR-
GESS, Detective; T. K. SPRINGFIELD, Detective;
J. H. MAY, Detective; ERNEST HAMILTON, Solic-
itor; HAL W. ROACH, Attorney,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-99-911-6-20AK)
Submitted: March 28, 2000 Decided: April 18, 2000
Before MURNAGHAN, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Edward Lawrence, Appellant Pro Se. Floyd Matlock Elliott,
Greenville, South Carolina; Charles Franklin Turner, Jr., CLARKSON,
WALSH, RHENEY & TURNER, Greenville, South Carolina; Robert Paul
Foster, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

* Lawrence states that he is not relying on § 1983. This does
not affect our disposition of his appeal.
2
PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief on
his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint. * We have re-
viewed the record and the district’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Lawrence v. Greenville Police Dep’t, No. CA-99-911-6-
20AK (D.S.C. Oct. 13, 1999). We further deny Lawrence’s motions to
obtain a transcript at government expense, to amend his informal
brief, for appointment of counsel, and for leave to amend his
complaint. 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

-- 2 of 2 --