Filed: Feb. 10, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7290 JOHN EDWARD JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus MICHAEL GAINES, Chairman; UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 97-1719-S) Submitted: January 22, 1998 Decided: February 10, 1998 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7290 JOHN EDWARD JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus MICHAEL GAINES, Chairman; UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 97-1719-S) Submitted: January 22, 1998 Decided: February 10, 1998 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinio..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7290 JOHN EDWARD JONES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus MICHAEL GAINES, Chairman; UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA- 97-1719-S) Submitted: January 22, 1998 Decided: February 10, 1998 Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Edward Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying his pe- tition for writ of mandamus and motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Jones v. Gaines, No. CA-97-1719-S (D. Md. Aug. 12, 1997; Aug. 25, 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
