Opinion
No. 13-1199
02-04-2014
SHAWN BROWN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNKNOWN OFFICERS OF THE PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT; OFFICER ZACHARY O'LARE; OFFICER ANTHONY KING; SGT. ERIC BROWN, Defendants - Appellees, and PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MD; ROBBIE LOVEDAY; CPL DARIN BUSH; RODNEY LEWIS; CPL. TYRONE SAVAGE; OFFICER BEAU JARVIS; OFFICER ANTONIO SAVOY; SGT. VONDELL SMITH, Defendants.
Shawn Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Tonia Yvetta Belton Gofreed, PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY OFFICE OF LAW, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District Judge. (8:07-cv-02591-DKC) Before KING, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Shawn Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Tonia Yvetta Belton Gofreed, PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY OFFICE OF LAW, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Shawn Brown appeals the district court's order entered in accordance with the jury's verdict finding for the Defendants in Brown's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action alleging excessive use of force.
We will reverse a jury's verdict only when there is a complete absence of probative facts to support the jury's conclusions. Sherrill White Constr., Inc. v. South Carolina Nat'l Bank, 713 F.2d 1047, 1050 (4th Cir. 1983). The "verdict must stand if, taking the evidence in the light most favorable to Defendant, there is 'any substantial evidence' to support it." Vodrey v. Golden, 864 F.2d 28, 30 n.4 (4th Cir. 1988). "Substantial evidence" is such evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support the conclusion even if different conclusions also might be supported by the evidence. Gibralter Sav. v. LDBrinkman Corp., 860 F.2d 1275, 1297 (5th Cir. 1988). Finally, in reviewing a jury verdict, we do not weigh the evidence or review witness credibility. United States v. Saunders, 886 F.2d 56, 60 (4th Cir. 1989).
The jury heard testimony from a total of thirteen witnesses over the course of four days. The jury clearly believed the testimony of the Defendants' witnesses. Because we do not weigh the credibility of witnesses, Brown cannot show that there was a complete absence of probative facts to support the jury's verdict. Accordingly, we affirm. 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