Filed: Jul. 30, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6644 ANTHONY D. KING, Petitioner - Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; M. MITCHELL, Warden, Edgefield, in official capacity, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (9:09-cv-00323-HMH) Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 30, 2009 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6644 ANTHONY D. KING, Petitioner - Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; M. MITCHELL, Warden, Edgefield, in official capacity, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (9:09-cv-00323-HMH) Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 30, 2009 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior C..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-6644 ANTHONY D. KING, Petitioner - Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; M. MITCHELL, Warden, Edgefield, in official capacity, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (9:09-cv-00323-HMH) Submitted: July 23, 2009 Decided: July 30, 2009 Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony D. King, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Anthony King, 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 (2006) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See King v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, No. 9- 09-cv-00323-HMH (D.S.C. Mar. 24, 2009). 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
