Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Meachum v. Smith, 04-6836 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-6836 Visitors: 29
Filed: Dec. 21, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6836 GERALD MEACHUM, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOSEPH SMITH, Warden; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-2730-9-12) Submitted: December 16, 2004 Decided: December 21, 2004 Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. G
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6836 GERALD MEACHUM, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOSEPH SMITH, Warden; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. C. Weston Houck, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-2730-9-12) Submitted: December 16, 2004 Decided: December 21, 2004 Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Gerald Meachum, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Gerald Meachum appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition, construing the petition as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and dismissing it as successive. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Meachum v. Smith, No. CA-03-2730-9-12 (D.S.C. April 22, 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 -
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