Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Akinsehinwa v. I.C.E., 05-7727 (2006)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-7727 Visitors: 32
Filed: Mar. 29, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7727 CHRISTOPHER AKINSEHINWA, Petitioner - Appellant, versus IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, (I.C.E.); DOUGLAS C. DEVENYNS, Warden of Wicomico County Detention Center, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (CA-05-2366-WDQ) Submitted: March 23, 2006 Decided: March 29, 2006 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILL
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7727 CHRISTOPHER AKINSEHINWA, Petitioner - Appellant, versus IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, (I.C.E.); DOUGLAS C. DEVENYNS, Warden of Wicomico County Detention Center, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (CA-05-2366-WDQ) Submitted: March 23, 2006 Decided: March 29, 2006 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher Akinsehinwa, Appellant Pro Se. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland; George William Maugans, III, Special United States Attorney, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Christopher Akinsehinwa 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 for the reasons stated by the district court. See Akinsehinwa v. I.C.E., No. CA-05-2366-WDQ (D. Md. Oct. 13, 2005). We also deny Akinsehinwa’s motion for injunctive relief. 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