Filed: Jun. 20, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6649 MATTHEW BARRINGTON GWYN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN TIMOTHY STEWART, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (2:11-cv-00104-JPB-DJJ) Submitted: June 14, 2012 Decided: June 20, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6649 MATTHEW BARRINGTON GWYN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN TIMOTHY STEWART, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (2:11-cv-00104-JPB-DJJ) Submitted: June 14, 2012 Decided: June 20, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew B..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6649 MATTHEW BARRINGTON GWYN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN TIMOTHY STEWART, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (2:11-cv-00104-JPB-DJJ) Submitted: June 14, 2012 Decided: June 20, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew Barrington Gwyn, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Matthew Barrington Gwyn, 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, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Gwyn v. Stewart, No. 2:11-cv- 00104-JPB-DJJ (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 23, 2012). 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
