Filed: May 22, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7407 WILLIAM HEWLETT, Petitioner – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION; WARDEN TIMOTHY S. STEWART, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:13-cv-02814-WDQ) Submitted: March 30, 2015 Decided: May 22, 2015 Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7407 WILLIAM HEWLETT, Petitioner – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION; WARDEN TIMOTHY S. STEWART, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge. (1:13-cv-02814-WDQ) Submitted: March 30, 2015 Decided: May 22, 2015 Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7407
WILLIAM HEWLETT,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION; WARDEN TIMOTHY S. STEWART,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District
Judge. (1:13-cv-02814-WDQ)
Submitted: March 30, 2015 Decided: May 22, 2015
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Hewlett, Appellant Pro Se. Molissa Heather Farber,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William Hewlett, 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 affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. Hewlett v. United States Parole Comm’n, No.
1:13-cv-02814-WDQ (D. Md. Sept. 8, 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