Filed: Aug. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6432 KELLY RAY JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:14-hc-02131-D) Submitted: July 27, 2018 Decided: August 9, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cu
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6432 KELLY RAY JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:14-hc-02131-D) Submitted: July 27, 2018 Decided: August 9, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cur..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-6432
KELLY RAY JONES,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:14-hc-02131-D)
Submitted: July 27, 2018 Decided: August 9, 2018
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kelly Ray Jones, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kelly Ray Jones, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. Jones sought to challenge his convictions
and sentence. We have reviewed the record in light of our recent Circuit precedent,
including United States v. Wheeler,
886 F.3d 415 (4th Cir. 2018), and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones v. United
States, No. 5:14-hc-02131-D (E.D.N.C. Feb. 3, 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