Filed: Jan. 06, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7137 QUENTIN A. WHALEY, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 97-1397-S) Submitted: November 25, 1997 Decided: January 6, 1998 Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Quentin A. Whaley,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7137 QUENTIN A. WHALEY, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 97-1397-S) Submitted: November 25, 1997 Decided: January 6, 1998 Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Quentin A. Whaley, S..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7137 QUENTIN A. WHALEY, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 97-1397-S) Submitted: November 25, 1997 Decided: January 6, 1998 Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Quentin A. Whaley, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland; Larry David Adams, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Ac- cordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Whaley v. United States Parole Commission, No. CA-97-1397-S (D. Md. June 11, 1997). 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
