Filed: Jul. 25, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6032 JIMMY LOCKLEAR, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden, LSCI Butner, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-04-802-5-H) Submitted: June 22, 2005 Decided: July 25, 2005 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6032 JIMMY LOCKLEAR, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden, LSCI Butner, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-04-802-5-H) Submitted: June 22, 2005 Decided: July 25, 2005 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cur..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6032 JIMMY LOCKLEAR, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden, LSCI Butner, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-04-802-5-H) Submitted: June 22, 2005 Decided: July 25, 2005 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jimmy Locklear, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Jimmy Locklear, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record and have found no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Locklear v. Stansberry, No. CA-04-802-5-H (E.D.N.C. Dec. 14, 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 -
