Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Mischa Walker v. J. Saad, 17-6728 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 17-6728 Visitors: 20
Filed: Oct. 19, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6728 MISCHA WALKER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. J. SAAD, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:16-cv-00136-FPS-MJA) Submitted: October 17, 2017 Decided: October 19, 2017 Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 17-6728


MISCHA WALKER,

                    Petitioner - Appellant,

             v.

J. SAAD, Warden,

                    Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia,
at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:16-cv-00136-FPS-MJA)


Submitted: October 17, 2017                                   Decided: October 19, 2017


Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Mischa Absolomon Walker, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

      Mischa Absolomon Walker, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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.   Walker v. Saad, No. 5:16-cv-00136-FPS-MJA

(N.D.W. Va. May 30, 2017). 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