Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Roger Smith v. Christopher Gomez, 19-6838 (2019)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 19-6838 Visitors: 41
Filed: Oct. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6838 ROGER LEE SMITH, Petitioner - Appellant, v. CHRISTOPHER GOMEZ, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:19-cv-00145-JPB-JPM) Submitted: October 15, 2019 Decided: October 18, 2019 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinio
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                       No. 19-6838


ROGER LEE SMITH,

                     Petitioner - Appellant,

              v.

CHRISTOPHER GOMEZ, Warden,

                     Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:19-cv-00145-JPB-JPM)


Submitted: October 15, 2019                                   Decided: October 18, 2019


Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and THACKER and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Roger Lee Smith, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Roger Lee Smith, 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. Smith v. Gomez, No. 5:19-cv-00145-JPB-JPM

(N.D.W. Va. Apr. 30, 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

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