Filed: Jul. 22, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6602 LEON A. BARBOUR, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-03-383-3) Submitted: July 15, 2004 Decided: July 22, 2004 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leon A. Barbour, Jr., Appellant Pro S
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6602 LEON A. BARBOUR, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-03-383-3) Submitted: July 15, 2004 Decided: July 22, 2004 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leon A. Barbour, Jr., Appellant Pro Se..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6602 LEON A. BARBOUR, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CA-03-383-3) Submitted: July 15, 2004 Decided: July 22, 2004 Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leon A. Barbour, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Tara Louise Casey, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Leon A. Barbour, Jr., a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order 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 Barbour v. Brooks, No. CA-03-383-3 (E.D. Va. Mar. 23, 2004). 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 -
