Filed: Jan. 04, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-1881 _ Thomas S. Ginn, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant, v. C.V. Rivera, Warden, FCC - Forrest City Low, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee. _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena _ Submitted: December 27, 2016 Filed: January 4, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Federal inmate Thomas Ginn appeals the district c
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-1881 _ Thomas S. Ginn, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant, v. C.V. Rivera, Warden, FCC - Forrest City Low, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee. _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena _ Submitted: December 27, 2016 Filed: January 4, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Federal inmate Thomas Ginn appeals the district co..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-1881
___________________________
Thomas S. Ginn,
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
C.V. Rivera, Warden, FCC - Forrest City Low,
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee.
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Helena
____________
Submitted: December 27, 2016
Filed: January 4, 2017
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Federal inmate Thomas Ginn appeals the district court’s1 denial of his 28
U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he requested federal sentence credit for time that he
1
The Honorable J. Thomas Ray, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern
District of Arkansas.
spent in custody from January 20, 2010, through September 12, 2013. Upon careful
de novo review, see Mitchell v. United States Parole Comm’n,
538 F.3d 948, 951(8th
Cir. 2008), we agree with the district court’s reasoning and conclusion that habeas
relief was not warranted. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-