Filed: May 29, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6455 DAMON ELLIOTT, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ERIC D. WILSON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:14-cv-00209-LO-JFA) 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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Damon Elliott, Appellant
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-6455 DAMON ELLIOTT, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ERIC D. WILSON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:14-cv-00209-LO-JFA) 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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Damon Elliott, Appellant ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6455
DAMON ELLIOTT,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ERIC D. WILSON,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District
Judge. (1:14-cv-00209-LO-JFA)
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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Damon Elliott, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Damon Elliott, 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, although we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court. Elliott v. Wilson, No. 1:14-cv-00209-LO-JFA
(E.D. Va. filed Mar. 11, 2014; entered Mar. 14, 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