Filed: Sep. 05, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6339 AINSWORTH C. JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GEORGE SNYDER; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:05-hc-00811-H) Submitted: August 24, 2007 Decided: September 5, 2007 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6339 AINSWORTH C. JACKSON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GEORGE SNYDER; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:05-hc-00811-H) Submitted: August 24, 2007 Decided: September 5, 2007 Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam o..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6339
AINSWORTH C. JACKSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
GEORGE SNYDER; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior
District Judge. (5:05-hc-00811-H)
Submitted: August 24, 2007 Decided: September 5, 2007
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ainsworth C. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ainsworth C. Jackson, 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 substantially for the
reasons stated by the district court.* Jackson v. Snyder, No.
5:05-hc-00811-H (E.D.N.C. Feb. 15, 2007). 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
*
We decline to adopt the reasoning of the district court to
the extent it relies on the doctrine of res judicata, but note that
related doctrines such as successiveness and the abuse of the writ
doctrine support the district court’s disposition of Jackson’s
petition. See Zayas v. INS,
311 F.3d 247, 256-58 (3d Cir. 2002).
- 2 -