Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Medina-Vazquez v. Wetzel, 05-7960 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-7960 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jan. 24, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7960 PEDRO MEDINA-VAZQUEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MONICA WETZEL, Warden; RUTH YANCEY, Warden of Federal Correctional Institution at Williamsburg, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (9:05-cv-01915-GRA) Submitted: December 11, 2006 Decided: January 24, 2007 Before MICHAEL and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7960 PEDRO MEDINA-VAZQUEZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MONICA WETZEL, Warden; RUTH YANCEY, Warden of Federal Correctional Institution at Williamsburg, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (9:05-cv-01915-GRA) Submitted: December 11, 2006 Decided: January 24, 2007 Before MICHAEL and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Pedro Medina-Vazquez, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Pedro Medina-Vazquez, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Medina-Vazquez v. Wetzel, No. 9:05-cv-01915-GRA (D.S.C. Sept. 7, 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