Filed: Jun. 02, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7809 MELVIN AVON THOMAS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 03-3039-1-CCB) Submitted: May 27, 2004 Decided: June 2, 2004 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melvin Avon Thomas, Appellant Pro Se
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7809 MELVIN AVON THOMAS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 03-3039-1-CCB) Submitted: May 27, 2004 Decided: June 2, 2004 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melvin Avon Thomas, Appellant Pro Se...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7809 MELVIN AVON THOMAS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA- 03-3039-1-CCB) Submitted: May 27, 2004 Decided: June 2, 2004 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melvin Avon Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Melvin Avon Thomas appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Thomas v. United States, No. CA-03-3039-1-CCB (D. Md. filed Nov. 3, 2003 & entered Nov. 4, 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 -
