Filed: Oct. 26, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7089 ELIJAH JEROME WHITE, Petitioner – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; M. RIVERA, Warden, Respondents – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (3:08-cv-03681-PMD) Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 26, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirme
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7089 ELIJAH JEROME WHITE, Petitioner – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; M. RIVERA, Warden, Respondents – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (3:08-cv-03681-PMD) Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 26, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7089 ELIJAH JEROME WHITE, Petitioner – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; M. RIVERA, Warden, Respondents – Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (3:08-cv-03681-PMD) Submitted: October 20, 2009 Decided: October 26, 2009 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Elijah Jerome White, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Elijah Jerome White, 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 (2006) petition, and a subsequent order denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. White v. United States, No. 3:08-cv- 03681-PMD (D.S.C. May 21, 2009 & June 8, 2009). 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
