Filed: Dec. 31, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7432 KEVIN M. GORDON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOYCE K. CONLEY; B. SMITH, Case Manager; D. ACKER, Counselor, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Charles H. Haden II, District Judge. (CA-99-204-5) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 31, 2002 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Af
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7432 KEVIN M. GORDON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOYCE K. CONLEY; B. SMITH, Case Manager; D. ACKER, Counselor, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Charles H. Haden II, District Judge. (CA-99-204-5) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 31, 2002 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Aff..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7432 KEVIN M. GORDON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOYCE K. CONLEY; B. SMITH, Case Manager; D. ACKER, Counselor, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Charles H. Haden II, District Judge. (CA-99-204-5) Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 31, 2002 Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kevin M. Gordon, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Kevin M. Gordon, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to alter or amend the court’s previous judgment accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000).* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Gordon v. Conley, No. CA-99-204-5 (S.D.W. Va. July 25, 2002). 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 * To the extent Gordon appeals the district court order denying relief under § 2241, his notice of appeal is untimely. 2