Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Daren Gadsden v. Robert Koppel, 13-6849 (2013)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 13-6849 Visitors: 62
Filed: Aug. 14, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6849 DAREN GADSDEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ROBERT KOPPEL, Warden; SUJIT RAMAN; ROD J. ROSENSTEIN; US MARSHAL’S OFFICE; WILLIAM D. QUARLES, JR., Judge; ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. (1:13-cv-00671-ELH) Submitted: August 5, 2013 Decided: August 14, 2013 Before WILKI
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6849 DAREN GADSDEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ROBERT KOPPEL, Warden; SUJIT RAMAN; ROD J. ROSENSTEIN; US MARSHAL’S OFFICE; WILLIAM D. QUARLES, JR., Judge; ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Ellen L. Hollander, District Judge. (1:13-cv-00671-ELH) Submitted: August 5, 2013 Decided: August 14, 2013 Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daren Gadsden, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Daren Gadsden, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2013) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny Gadsden’s motion for a transcript at Government expense and affirm the district court’s order as modified to reflect that the disposition is without prejudice. Gadsden v. Koppel, No. 1:13-cv-00671-ELH (D. Md. May 17, 2013). 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 AS MODIFIED 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