Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Griffin v. US Parole Comm, 03-7886 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-7886 Visitors: 51
Filed: Apr. 22, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7886 JOHNNIE MACK GRIFFIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION; JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden, Federal Correction Institution, Petersburg, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-936) Submitted: April 15, 2004 Decided: April 22, 2004 Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judg
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7886 JOHNNIE MACK GRIFFIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION; JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden, Federal Correction Institution, Petersburg, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-936) Submitted: April 15, 2004 Decided: April 22, 2004 Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johnnie Mack Griffin, Appellant Pro Se. Tara Louise Casey, Robert P. McIntosh, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Johnnie Mack Griffin, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Griffin v. United States Parole Comm’n, No. CA-02-936 (E.D. Va. Nov. 19, 2003). 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 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer