Filed: Jan. 23, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7593 RASHAWN LAMONT ALEXANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOYCE FRANCIS, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (1:06-cv-00094-JSK) Submitted: January 18, 2007 Decided: January 23, 2007 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rash
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7593 RASHAWN LAMONT ALEXANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOYCE FRANCIS, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (1:06-cv-00094-JSK) Submitted: January 18, 2007 Decided: January 23, 2007 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rasha..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7593 RASHAWN LAMONT ALEXANDER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOYCE FRANCIS, Warden, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (1:06-cv-00094-JSK) Submitted: January 18, 2007 Decided: January 23, 2007 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rashawn Lamont Alexander, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rashawn Lamont Alexander, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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. Alexander v. Francis, No. 1:06-cv-00094-JSK (N.D.W. Va. Aug. 29, 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 -
