Filed: Oct. 09, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7154 JAMES EDWARD BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus D. L. HOBBS, Warden, Jesup FCI, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-2173-7-13BG) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: October 9, 2001 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Ed
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7154 JAMES EDWARD BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus D. L. HOBBS, Warden, Jesup FCI, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-2173-7-13BG) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: October 9, 2001 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edw..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7154 JAMES EDWARD BROWN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus D. L. HOBBS, Warden, Jesup FCI, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-2173-7-13BG) Submitted: September 20, 2001 Decided: October 9, 2001 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edward Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James Edward Brown appeals the district court order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition without prejudice. We have reviewed the record, the district court order and the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and affirm. 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
