Filed: Nov. 24, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6958 WILLIAM HENRY COLEMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STEVEN GAL, Warden; GERARDO MALDONADO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA-03-77-25AJ) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 24, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished pe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6958 WILLIAM HENRY COLEMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STEVEN GAL, Warden; GERARDO MALDONADO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA-03-77-25AJ) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 24, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6958 WILLIAM HENRY COLEMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STEVEN GAL, Warden; GERARDO MALDONADO, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA-03-77-25AJ) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 24, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Henry Coleman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: William Henry Coleman, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 for the reasons stated by the district court. See Coleman v. Gal, No. CA-03-77-25AJ (D.S.C. May 11, 2004). 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 -
