Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

William Abbott v. United States, 14-6368 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-6368 Visitors: 17
Filed: May 29, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6368 WILLIAM R. ABBOTT, Petitioner - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (2:13-cv-00473-RGD-LRL) Submitted: May 22, 2014 Decided: May 29, 2014 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. W
More
                              UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 14-6368


WILLIAM R. ABBOTT,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.     Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:13-cv-00473-RGD-LRL)


Submitted:   May 22, 2014                         Decided: May 29, 2014


Before TRAXLER,   Chief     Judge,   and   HAMILTON   and   DAVIS,   Senior
Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


William R. Abbott, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

            William    R.      Abbott,    a    federal    prisoner,    appeals       the

district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241

(2012)    petition.       We     have    reviewed     the   record    and     find   no

reversible error.         Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in

forma    pauperis   and     we   affirm       for   the   reasons    stated    by    the

district court.       Abbott v. United States, No. 2:13-cv-00473-RGD-

LRL (E.D. Va. Jan. 10, 2014).                  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




                                           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