Filed: Mar. 24, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6093 ALBERT CHARLES BURGESS, Petitioner – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (1:09-cv-00451-GCM) Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 24, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert Charles
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6093 ALBERT CHARLES BURGESS, Petitioner – Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Senior District Judge. (1:09-cv-00451-GCM) Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 24, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert Charles ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6093
ALBERT CHARLES BURGESS,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen,
Senior District Judge. (1:09-cv-00451-GCM)
Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 24, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Albert Charles Burgess, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Albert Charles Burgess appeals the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C § 2241 (2006) petition. We
have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Burgess v. United States, No. 1:09-cv-00451-GCM
(W.D.N.C. filed Jan. 6 & Jan. 13, 2010). We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2