Michael Allen, Jr. v. George Gillenwater ( 2013 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-2121
MICHAEL A. ALLEN, JR.; SHEILA JONES,
Plaintiffs – Appellants,
v.
GEORGE GILLENWATER; JEREMY JONES; D. E. YOUNG; DET.
TUNSTALL; WILLIAM KELLY; G. A. HARRIS; ROBERT VOORHEES,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles,
District Judge. (1:10-cv-00359-CCE-JEP)
Submitted: February 22, 2013 Decided: March 28, 2013
Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael A. Allen, Jr., Sheila Jones, Appellants Pro Se. Kari
Russwurm Johnson, CRANFILL, SUMNER & HARTZOG, LLP, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Appellants appeal the district court’s order granting
summary judgment on their Fourth Amendment claims raised under
42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) and Appellant Allen’s state law
defamation claim. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. * Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the
reasons stated by the district court. Allen v. Gillenwater, No.
1:10-cv-00359-CCE-JEP (M.D.N.C. Aug. 15, 2012). We deny
Appellants’ motion for appointment of counsel. 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
*
Although Appellants allege that Appellees improperly
withheld discovery materials from them, we find no basis in the
record to support this assertion. Insofar as Appellants seek to
introduce new documents and request previously-unavailable
records from a criminal case, we must decline to consider these
materials. See Fed. R. App. P. 10 (defining “record on appeal”
and grounds for supplementation); United States v. Hussein, 478
F.3d 318, 335-36 (6th Cir. 2007) (recognizing that
supplementation of record is intended to “correct omissions from
or misstatements in the record for appeal, not to introduce new
evidence in the court of appeals”).
2