Filed: Apr. 24, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6232 JAMES EDWARD BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; WARDEN, Federal Prison Camp at Edgefield, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (9:07-cv-03285-GRA) Submitted: April 17, 2008 Decided: April 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublishe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6232 JAMES EDWARD BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; WARDEN, Federal Prison Camp at Edgefield, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (9:07-cv-03285-GRA) Submitted: April 17, 2008 Decided: April 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6232 JAMES EDWARD BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; WARDEN, Federal Prison Camp at Edgefield, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (9:07-cv-03285-GRA) Submitted: April 17, 2008 Decided: April 24, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edward Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James Edward Brown appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice his petition for a writ of audita querela. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Brown, No. 9:07-cv-03285-GRA (D.S.C. filed Jan. 14, 2008; entered Jan. 15, 2008). 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 -
