Filed: Jan. 09, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7329 JOHNNY WADE JOHNSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus KEITH E. OLSON, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-97-535-5) Submitted: November 26, 1997 Decided: January 9, 1998 Before HALL and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7329 JOHNNY WADE JOHNSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus KEITH E. OLSON, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-97-535-5) Submitted: November 26, 1997 Decided: January 9, 1998 Before HALL and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jo..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7329 JOHNNY WADE JOHNSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus KEITH E. OLSON, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. David A. Faber, District Judge. (CA-97-535-5) Submitted: November 26, 1997 Decided: January 9, 1998 Before HALL and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johnny Wade Johnson, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Johnson v. Olson, No. CA-97-535-5 (S.D.W. Va., July 18, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma- terials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2
