Filed: Jun. 22, 2020
Latest Update: Sep. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-7830 DWAYNE E. FREEMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. SCOTLAND COUNTY, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:19-hc-02103-FL) Submitted: June 18, 2020 Decided: June 22, 2020 Before FLOYD, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dwayne E. Freeman, Appellant Pro Se.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-7830 DWAYNE E. FREEMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. SCOTLAND COUNTY, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:19-hc-02103-FL) Submitted: June 18, 2020 Decided: June 22, 2020 Before FLOYD, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dwayne E. Freeman, Appellant Pro Se. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-7830
DWAYNE E. FREEMAN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SCOTLAND COUNTY,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:19-hc-02103-FL)
Submitted: June 18, 2020 Decided: June 22, 2020
Before FLOYD, THACKER, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dwayne E. Freeman, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dwayne E. Freeman appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 (2018) petition as duplicative and an improper vehicle for his claims. On appeal,
we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).
Because Freeman’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s
disposition, Freeman has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See Jackson v.
Lightsey,
775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document;
under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 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
2