Filed: Oct. 24, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 24, 2007 No. 06-10149 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk MELVIN TRAYLOR Petitioner-Appellant v. DAN JOSLIN, Warden Respondant-Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CV-2333 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Melvin Traylor, federal prisoner # 29612-077, filed an applica
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 24, 2007 No. 06-10149 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk MELVIN TRAYLOR Petitioner-Appellant v. DAN JOSLIN, Warden Respondant-Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CV-2333 Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Melvin Traylor, federal prisoner # 29612-077, filed an applicat..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
October 24, 2007
No. 06-10149
Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
MELVIN TRAYLOR
Petitioner-Appellant
v.
DAN JOSLIN, Warden
Respondant-Appellee
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:05-CV-2333
Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Melvin Traylor, federal prisoner # 29612-077, filed an application for a
writ of habeas corpus, invoking 28 U.S.C. § 2241, and challenging the sentence
imposed related to his conviction of conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine. The
district court construed the habeas application as an unauthorized successive
28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and dismissed it without prejudice as an unauthorized
successive § 2255 motion. Traylor argues the merits of his habeas claim only
and does not discuss in his brief whether the district court erred. See Yohey v.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion
should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 06-10149
Collins,
985 F.2d 222, 224–25 (5th Cir. 1993) (issues not briefed are waived).
The appeal is DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.
2