Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Terry Sanders v. Terry O'Brien, 13-7874 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 13-7874 Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 28, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-7874 TERRY L. SANDERS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. TERRY O’BRIEN, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:13-cv-00016-GMG-JES) Submitted: March 25, 2014 Decided: March 28, 2014 Before GREGORY, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Terry L. Sanders, Appellant Pro Se.
More
                              UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 13-7874


TERRY L. SANDERS,

                 Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

TERRY O’BRIEN,

                 Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg.     Gina M. Groh,
District Judge. (3:13-cv-00016-GMG-JES)


Submitted:   March 25, 2014                 Decided:   March 28, 2014


Before GREGORY, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Terry L. Sanders, Appellant Pro Se.      Erin K. Reisenweber,
Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia,
for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

            Terry     L.    Sanders,      a       federal   prisoner,     appeals      the

district court’s order accepting in part the recommendation of

the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241

(2012)    petition.         We   have   reviewed        the      record   and   find   no

reversible error.          Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court.            Sanders v. O’Brien, No. 3:13-cv-00016-

GMG-JES    (N.D.W.    Va.     Nov.   5,       2013).        We   dispense   with    oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before this court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.



                                                                                AFFIRMED




                                              2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer