Filed: Jul. 17, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6345 MARTY BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. SARAH REVELL; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:12-hc-02183-BO) Submitted: July 11, 2014 Decided: July 17, 2014 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opin
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6345 MARTY BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. SARAH REVELL; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:12-hc-02183-BO) Submitted: July 11, 2014 Decided: July 17, 2014 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6345
MARTY BROWN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SARAH REVELL; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:12-hc-02183-BO)
Submitted: July 11, 2014 Decided: July 17, 2014
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Marty Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marty Brown, a federal prisoner, appeals the district
court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012)
petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis
and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Brown v. Revell, No. 5:12-hc-02183-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 25, 2014).
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