Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Morris Fahnbulleh v. Brick Tripp, 17-6861 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 17-6861 Visitors: 19
Filed: Nov. 27, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6861 MORRIS B. FAHNBULLEH, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BRICK TRIPP, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:16-hc-02227-D) Submitted: November 21, 2017 Decided: November 27, 2017 Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                       No. 17-6861


MORRIS B. FAHNBULLEH,

                     Petitioner - Appellant,

              v.

BRICK TRIPP,

                     Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:16-hc-02227-D)


Submitted: November 21, 2017                                Decided: November 27, 2017


Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Morris B. Fahnbulleh, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Morris B. Fahnbulleh, 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 affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court.    Fahnbulleh v. Tripp, No. 5:16-hc-02227-D

(E.D.N.C. June 28, 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