Filed: Jul. 27, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6521 CARL A. EUBANKS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus TERRY A. O’BRIEN, Warden; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:06-cv-00107-sgw) Submitted: July 20, 2006 Decided: July 27, 2006 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublishe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6521 CARL A. EUBANKS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus TERRY A. O’BRIEN, Warden; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:06-cv-00107-sgw) Submitted: July 20, 2006 Decided: July 27, 2006 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-6521 CARL A. EUBANKS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus TERRY A. O’BRIEN, Warden; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:06-cv-00107-sgw) Submitted: July 20, 2006 Decided: July 27, 2006 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carl A. Eubanks, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Carl A. Eubanks, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Eubanks v. O’Brien, No. 7:06-cv-107-SGW (W.D. Va., Feb. 16, 2006; filed Feb. 28, 2006 & entered Mar. 1, 2006). 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 -
