Filed: Jun. 26, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7871 DARRIUS LAMONT WALKER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-499-5-H) Submitted: June 22, 2006 Decided: June 26, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrius
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7871 DARRIUS LAMONT WALKER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-499-5-H) Submitted: June 22, 2006 Decided: June 26, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrius ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7871 DARRIUS LAMONT WALKER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (CA-05-499-5-H) Submitted: June 22, 2006 Decided: June 26, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrius Lamont Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Darrius Lamont Walker, a federal prisoner, 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. Walker v. Stansberry, No. CA-05-499-5-H (E.D.N.C. Sept. 28, 2005). 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 -
