Filed: Jan. 05, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-7236 PIERRE A. BYRD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MILDRED L. RIVERA, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (4:10-cv-01632-CMC) Submitted: December 16, 2011 Decided: January 5, 2012 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-7236 PIERRE A. BYRD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. MILDRED L. RIVERA, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (4:10-cv-01632-CMC) Submitted: December 16, 2011 Decided: January 5, 2012 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-7236
PIERRE A. BYRD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
MILDRED L. RIVERA, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (4:10-cv-01632-CMC)
Submitted: December 16, 2011 Decided: January 5, 2012
Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Pierre A. Byrd, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Pierre A. Byrd, 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.A. § 2241
(West 2006 & Supp. 2011) petition. We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. Byrd v. Rivera, No. 4:10-
cv-01632-CMC (D.S.C. Aug. 25, 2011). 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