Filed: Dec. 18, 2008
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6661 VERNARDE COTTON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN JOYCE FRANCIS, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:06-cv-00031-FPS-JES) Submitted: October 20, 2008 Decided: December 18, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Verna
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6661 VERNARDE COTTON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN JOYCE FRANCIS, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:06-cv-00031-FPS-JES) Submitted: October 20, 2008 Decided: December 18, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vernar..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6661 VERNARDE COTTON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN JOYCE FRANCIS, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:06-cv-00031-FPS-JES) Submitted: October 20, 2008 Decided: December 18, 2008 Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vernarde Cotton, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Betsy C. Jividen, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Vernarde Cotton, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Cotton’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition, and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Cotton v. Francis, No. 3:06-cv- 00031-FPS-JES (N.D. W. Va. Mar. 12, 2007 & Mar. 28, 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