Filed: Dec. 27, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7469 CHRISTOPHER M. WATKINS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOE DRIVER, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John S. Kaull, Magistrate Judge. (2:06-cv-00042) Submitted: December 17, 2007 Decided: December 27, 2007 Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher M. Watkins,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7469 CHRISTOPHER M. WATKINS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOE DRIVER, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John S. Kaull, Magistrate Judge. (2:06-cv-00042) Submitted: December 17, 2007 Decided: December 27, 2007 Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher M. Watkins, A..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7469 CHRISTOPHER M. WATKINS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JOE DRIVER, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John S. Kaull, Magistrate Judge. (2:06-cv-00042) Submitted: December 17, 2007 Decided: December 27, 2007 Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher M. Watkins, Appellant Pro Se. Betsy S. Jividen, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Christopher M. Watkins, a federal prisoner, appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition.* We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Watkins’s motions to expedite and for bail pending appeal, and we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. See Watkins v. Driver, No. 2:06- cv-00042 (N.D. W. Va. Sept. 20, 2007). 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 * The parties consented to jurisdiction of the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000). - 2 -