Filed: Mar. 14, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7536 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SH’DELL NICHOLAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (CR-96-202; CA-04-526-7) Submitted: March 10, 2005 Decided: March 14, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sh’dell Nicholas, Appellant
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7536 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SH’DELL NICHOLAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (CR-96-202; CA-04-526-7) Submitted: March 10, 2005 Decided: March 14, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sh’dell Nicholas, Appellant P..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7536 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus SH’DELL NICHOLAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (CR-96-202; CA-04-526-7) Submitted: March 10, 2005 Decided: March 14, 2005 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sh’dell Nicholas, Appellant Pro Se. Morgan Eugene Scott, Acting United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Sh’dell Nicholas, 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 United States v. Nicholas, CA-04-526-7 (W.D. Va. filed Sept. 9, 2004; entered Sept. 13, 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 -
