Rose Powell v. Tony Keller ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 11-1926
    ROSE C. POWELL,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    TONY A. KELLER; JORGE SOSA; JASON COY REID; TIMOTHY JAMES
    BREWER; LARRY WATERS; WILLIAM A. BRAFFORD; GRETCHEN C. F.
    SHAPPERT; RICHARD L. VOORHEES; CARL HORN, MAGISTRATE JUDGE;
    GREGORY A. FOREST; JAYME MILLER; US MARSHAL SERVICE; CATAWBA
    COUNTY; CATAWBA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; SHERIFF OF CATAWBA
    COUNTY;   CATAWBA  COUNTY   SHERIFF'S  DEPARTMENT;   COLDWELL
    BANKER; BOYD HASSELL INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES;
    ELVALORIE MATTHEWS; RICHARD MCDONNELL; MARK T. CALLOWAY;
    NEWTON POLICE DEPARTMENT; CONOVER POLICE DEPARTMENT,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen,
    Senior District Judge. (5:11-cv-00055-GCM)
    Submitted:   February 16, 2012              Decided:   February 21, 2012
    Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Rose C. Powell, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Rose    C.   Powell    appeals      the    district     court’s      order
    dismissing her 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     (2006) complaint for failure to
    state a claim.         On appeal, we confine our review to the issues
    raised   in    the    Appellant’s        brief.      See    4th   Cir.     R.    34(b).
    Because Powell’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for
    the district court’s disposition, she has forfeited appellate
    review   of     the    court’s      order.        Accordingly,      we    affirm      the
    district      court’s       judgment      and     deny     Powell’s       motion      for
    appointment of counsel.             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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-1926

Filed Date: 2/21/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021