Filed: Dec. 12, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7462 GENE ALLEN HERROLD, Petitioner - Appellant, versus J. E. GUNJA, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-01-1560-WMN) Submitted: November 26, 2001 Decided: December 12, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ge
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7462 GENE ALLEN HERROLD, Petitioner - Appellant, versus J. E. GUNJA, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-01-1560-WMN) Submitted: November 26, 2001 Decided: December 12, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gen..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7462 GENE ALLEN HERROLD, Petitioner - Appellant, versus J. E. GUNJA, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-01-1560-WMN) Submitted: November 26, 2001 Decided: December 12, 2001 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gene Allen Herrold, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Gene Allen Herrold appeals the district court’s order and order on reconsideration denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we af- firm on the reasoning of the district court. See Herrold v. Gunja, No. CA-01-1560-WMN (D. Md. filed June 1, 2001, entered June 4, 2001; filed July 25, 2001, entered July 25, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
