Filed: Jul. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6728 KEITH DEVON ADAMS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN, FCI-Estill, Respondent – Appellee, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (0:13-cv-03330-JFA) Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 29, 2014 Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6728 KEITH DEVON ADAMS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN, FCI-Estill, Respondent – Appellee, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (0:13-cv-03330-JFA) Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 29, 2014 Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by u..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6728
KEITH DEVON ADAMS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN, FCI-Estill,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (0:13-cv-03330-JFA)
Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 29, 2014
Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Keith Devon Adams, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Keith Devon Adams, 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
(2012) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. Adams v. Warden, No. 0:13-cv-03330-JFA
(D.S.C. Apr. 7, 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