Filed: Oct. 19, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6544 FLOYD O. HUNT, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. BLUE RIDGE REGIONAL JAIL, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:15-cv-00122-HEH-RCY) Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 19, 2015 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and, HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Floyd O. Hunt, Jr., Ap
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6544 FLOYD O. HUNT, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. BLUE RIDGE REGIONAL JAIL, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:15-cv-00122-HEH-RCY) Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 19, 2015 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and, HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Floyd O. Hunt, Jr., App..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6544
FLOYD O. HUNT, JR.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
BLUE RIDGE REGIONAL JAIL,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (3:15-cv-00122-HEH-RCY)
Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 19, 2015
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and, HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Floyd O. Hunt, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Floyd O. Hunt, Jr., appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his civil action on the ground that it was improperly
filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012). 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. Hunt v. Blue Ridge Reg’l
Jail, No. 3:15-cv-00122-HEH-RCY (E.D. Va. Mar. 19, 2015). 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