Filed: Oct. 28, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7088 KENNETH WARREN ALLISON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus MARK A. HENRY, Warden of F.C.I. Cumberland, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-98- 1326-L) Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 28, 1998 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth War
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7088 KENNETH WARREN ALLISON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus MARK A. HENRY, Warden of F.C.I. Cumberland, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-98- 1326-L) Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 28, 1998 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Warr..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7088 KENNETH WARREN ALLISON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus MARK A. HENRY, Warden of F.C.I. Cumberland, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-98- 1326-L) Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 28, 1998 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Warren Allison, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Kenneth Allison appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994). Our review of the record and the district court’s opinion reveals no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Allison v. Henry, No. CA-98-1326-L (D. Md. June 25, 1998). 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
