Filed: Jun. 20, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7770 JEFFREY PETER VAILLANCOURT, Petitioner - Appellant, v. JOEL J. ZIEGLER, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:09-cv-00162-IMK-DJJ) Submitted: June 16, 2011 Decided: June 20, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per c
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-7770 JEFFREY PETER VAILLANCOURT, Petitioner - Appellant, v. JOEL J. ZIEGLER, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:09-cv-00162-IMK-DJJ) Submitted: June 16, 2011 Decided: June 20, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cu..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-7770
JEFFREY PETER VAILLANCOURT,
Petitioner ─ Appellant,
v.
JOEL J. ZIEGLER, Warden,
Respondent ─ Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley,
District Judge. (1:09-cv-00162-IMK-DJJ)
Submitted: June 16, 2011 Decided: June 20, 2011
Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey Peter Vaillancourt, Appellant Pro Se. Alan McGonigal,
Assistant United States Attorney, Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr.,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey Peter Vaillancourt, a federal prisoner,
appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28
U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2010) petition. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Vaillancourt v. Ziegler, No. 1:09-cv-00162-IMK-DJJ (N.D.W. Va.
Dec. 20, 2010). 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