Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Truman v. Brooks, 04-7186 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 04-7186 Visitors: 16
Filed: Jan. 25, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7186 SVEN PATRICK TRUMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-03-841-2) Submitted: December 15, 2004 Decided: January 25, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sven Patrick Truman, Appellan
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7186 SVEN PATRICK TRUMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (CA-03-841-2) Submitted: December 15, 2004 Decided: January 25, 2005 Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sven Patrick Truman, Appellant Pro Se. Anita K. Henry, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Sven Patrick Truman, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s orders: (1) accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000); and (2) denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Truman v. Brooks, No. CA-03-841-2 (E.D. Va. June 2, 2004, and July 13, 2004). We grant Truman’s motion to supplement his informal brief and 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