Filed: Aug. 19, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6469 EDWARD JAMES EGAN, Petitioner – Appellant, v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (7:07-cv-00509-gec-mfu) Submitted: July 14, 2011 Decided: August 19, 2011 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpubl
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6469 EDWARD JAMES EGAN, Petitioner – Appellant, v. GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District Judge. (7:07-cv-00509-gec-mfu) Submitted: July 14, 2011 Decided: August 19, 2011 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpubli..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6469
EDWARD JAMES EGAN,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department of
Corrections,
Respondent – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior
District Judge. (7:07-cv-00509-gec-mfu)
Submitted: July 14, 2011 Decided: August 19, 2011
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Edward James Egan, Appellant Pro Se. Joshua Mikell Didlake,
Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Edward James Egan, Sr., appeals the district court’s
order denying his self-styled “Motion for Appearance to Testify
in a [P]ending [M]atter.” Because Egan’s informal briefs fail
to address the district court’s dismissal of the motion, this
issue has been abandoned. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Wahi v.
Charleston Area Med. Ctr., Inc.,
562 F.3d 599, 607 (4th Cir.
2009). In any event, we discern no infirmity in the district
court’s ruling. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
order. Egan v. Johnson, No. 7:07-cv-00509-gec-mfu (W.D. Va.
Feb. 11, 2011). We deny Egan’s motion for bail and 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