Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Howard-Pinson v. Army Clemency & Parole, 06-7560 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 06-7560 Visitors: 32
Filed: May 01, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7560 ROBERT M. HOWARD-PINSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ARMY CLEMENCY & PAROLE BOARD, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:05-cv-01157-CMH) Submitted: April 25, 2007 Decided: May 1, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert M. Ho
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7560 ROBERT M. HOWARD-PINSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ARMY CLEMENCY & PAROLE BOARD, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:05-cv-01157-CMH) Submitted: April 25, 2007 Decided: May 1, 2007 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert M. Howard-Pinson, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Michael Ranieri, Brian Eugene Bentley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Robert M. Howard-Pinson appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition challenging his military convictions. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Howard-Pinson v. Army Clemency & Parole Bd., No. 1:05-cv-01157-CMH (E.D. Va. filed July 10, 2006 & entered July 11, 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 -
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