Filed: Jul. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6522 CORBY MONTRELLE BRIDGERS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; JUSTIN ANDREWS, Warden, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-hc-02136-D) Submitted: July 16, 2019 Decided: July 19, 2019 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Co
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6522 CORBY MONTRELLE BRIDGERS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; JUSTIN ANDREWS, Warden, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-hc-02136-D) Submitted: July 16, 2019 Decided: July 19, 2019 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cor..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6522
CORBY MONTRELLE BRIDGERS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; JUSTIN ANDREWS, Warden,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-hc-02136-D)
Submitted: July 16, 2019 Decided: July 19, 2019
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Corby Montrelle Bridgers, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Corby Montrelle Bridgers, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order
dismissing 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. Bridgers v. United States,
No. 5:18-hc-02136-D (E.D.N.C. Mar. 8, 2019). 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