Freddie Andaya v. Detective J.P. McClaskey , 707 F. App'x 772 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 17-7111
    FREDDIE ANDAYA, a/k/a Raymond Garcia,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    DETECTIVE J.P. MCCLASKEY, DET. CITY OF CONCORD POLICE
    DEPARTMENT; DETECTIVE K. CHILDERS; DETECTIVE R. GONSALEZ;
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; DETECTIVE KELLY SEAGRAVES;
    DETECTIVE ELIZABETH LOVE; DETECTIVE G. BACOTE; DETECTIVE J.
    DAVIS; SHERIFF KEVIN AUTEN; DETECTIVE UVALDO RIOS,
    Defendants - Appellees,
    and
    CITY OF CONCORD, NORTH CAROLINA; ROWAN COUNTY, NORTH
    CAROLINA; CHIEF GUY SMITH,
    Defendants.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
    Greensboro. L. Patrick Auld, Magistrate Judge. (1:12-cv-00093-LPA)
    Submitted: December 21, 2017                                Decided: December 28, 2017
    Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
    Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Freddie Andaya, Appellant Pro Se. Torin L. Fury, William L. Hill, FRAZIER HILL &
    FURY, RLLP, Greensboro, North Carolina; Kenneth Ray Raynor, RAYNOR LAW FIRM,
    PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina; Lynne P. Klauer, Assistant United States Attorney,
    Steven N. Baker, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North
    Carolina, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    2
    PER CURIAM:
    Freddie Andaya appeals the magistrate judge’s text order 1 denying his Fed. R. Civ.
    P. 60(b) motion in which he asserted that the magistrate judge made a mistake by not
    appointing counsel to represent him in his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     (2012) excessive force action.
    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
    reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Andaya v. McClaskey, No. 1:12-cv-00093-LPA
    (M.D.N.C. July 25, 2017). We 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.
    AFFIRMED
    1
    The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge pursuant to 
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (c) (2012).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-7111

Citation Numbers: 707 F. App'x 772

Judges: Duncan, Hamilton, Per Curiam, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 12/28/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024