Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Lineberger v. United States, 00-7347 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-7347 Visitors: 17
Filed: Jul. 16, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7347 VINCENT EUGENE LINEBERGER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER, Director, Fed- eral Bureau of Prisons; STEVEN DEWALT, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution Butner Satel- lite Camp, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Jame
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7347 VINCENT EUGENE LINEBERGER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER, Director, Fed- eral Bureau of Prisons; STEVEN DEWALT, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution Butner Satel- lite Camp, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CA-00-103-5-1F) Submitted: June 29, 2001 Decided: July 16, 2001 Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent Eugene Lineberger, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raliegh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Vincent Eugene Lineberger appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny as moot Lineberger’s motion to transmit the record from the district court, deny his motion for appointment of counsel, and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Lineberger v. United States, No. CA-00-103-5-1F (E.D.N.C. Sept. 5, 2000). 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
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer