Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Giles, 05-6784 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-6784 Visitors: 8
Filed: Aug. 05, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6784 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DINO MARCELLUS GILES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-65-1-IMK) Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 5, 2005 Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dino Marcellus Giles
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6784 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DINO MARCELLUS GILES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-65-1-IMK) Submitted: July 27, 2005 Decided: August 5, 2005 Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dino Marcellus Giles, Appellant Pro Se. Bonnie S. Greenberg, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Dino Marcellus Giles, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissing Giles’ petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), and the court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Giles, No. CA-04-65-1-IMK (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 28, 2005; May 12, 2005). 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