Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Joseph Harden v. B. Antonelli, 18-6850 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 18-6850 Visitors: 38
Filed: Dec. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6850 JOSEPH HARDEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. B.M. ANTONELLI, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (6:18-cv-01057-DCC) Submitted: November 29, 2018 Decided: December 4, 2018 Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joseph Ha
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 18-6850


JOSEPH HARDEN,

                    Petitioner - Appellant,

             v.

B.M. ANTONELLI,

                    Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Greenville. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (6:18-cv-01057-DCC)


Submitted: November 29, 2018                                 Decided: December 4, 2018


Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Joseph Harden, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

      Joseph Hardin, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief without prejudice 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.   Harden v. Antonelli, No. 6:18-cv-01057-DCC

(D.S.C. July 5, 2018). 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

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer