Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Tony Jones v. Warden Zych, 12-8151 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 12-8151 Visitors: 38
Filed: Mar. 29, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-8151 TONY LAMONT JONES, Petitioner – Appellant, v. WARDEN C. ZYCH, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:12-cv-00496-SGW-RSB) Submitted: March 26, 2013 Decided: March 29, 2013 Before DUNCAN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Lamont Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Un
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-8151 TONY LAMONT JONES, Petitioner – Appellant, v. WARDEN C. ZYCH, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (7:12-cv-00496-SGW-RSB) Submitted: March 26, 2013 Decided: March 29, 2013 Before DUNCAN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Lamont Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony Lamont Jones, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2012) petition and denying his motion to alter or amend the judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Contrary to Jones’s assertions in the district court and on appeal, he was not assessed a fine or restitution as part of his federal sentence, and any change in his ability to pay has no impact on his obligation to serve his concurrent sentences of life imprisonment. We conclude that the district court adequately addressed Jones’s claims and properly concluded that Jones failed to state a cognizable claim for habeas relief. Accordingly, we affirm * substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Jones v. Zych, Case No. 7:12-cv-00496-SGW-RSB (W.D. Va. Nov. 26 & Dec. 12, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * While the district court denied a certificate of appealability, we conclude that no certificate of appealability is necessary to entertain this appeal, given Jones’s status as a federal prisoner. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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