Filed: Jan. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1860 In re: VICTOR J. BUENCAMINO, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (5:14-hc-02112-BO) Submitted: January 15, 2015 Decided: January 20, 2015 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor J. Buencamino, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Victor J. Buencamino, a fe
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1860 In re: VICTOR J. BUENCAMINO, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (5:14-hc-02112-BO) Submitted: January 15, 2015 Decided: January 20, 2015 Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Victor J. Buencamino, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Victor J. Buencamino, a fed..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1860
In re: VICTOR J. BUENCAMINO,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (5:14-hc-02112-BO)
Submitted: January 15, 2015 Decided: January 20, 2015
Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Victor J. Buencamino, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Victor J. Buencamino, a federal pretrial detainee, has
filed an original 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition seeking
relief from what he deems to be an unlawful detention. The
district court for the Eastern District of North Carolina has
denied an identical petition, and Buencamino has not
demonstrated that he is entitled to relief from this court. See
Fed. R. App. P. 22(a). Accordingly, although we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, we dismiss Buencamino’s petition. 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.
DISMISSED
2