Filed: Dec. 15, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7208 VICTOR HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GERALD MALDONADO, Warden FCI Estill, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-04-844) Submitted: December 9, 2004 Decided: December 15, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor Hernandez,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7208 VICTOR HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GERALD MALDONADO, Warden FCI Estill, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-04-844) Submitted: December 9, 2004 Decided: December 15, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor Hernandez, ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7208 VICTOR HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GERALD MALDONADO, Warden FCI Estill, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-04-844) Submitted: December 9, 2004 Decided: December 15, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor Hernandez, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Victor Hernandez appeals a district court judgment adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and affirm the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. We grant Hernandez leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. 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 -
