Filed: Jan. 08, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6420 VINCENT MICHAEL MARINO, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BART MASTERS, Warden, FCI McDowell, Respondent - Appellee, and BUREAU OF PRISONS; DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Respondents. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-32690) Submitted: November 21, 2017 Decided: January 8, 2018 Before KING, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit J
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-6420 VINCENT MICHAEL MARINO, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BART MASTERS, Warden, FCI McDowell, Respondent - Appellee, and BUREAU OF PRISONS; DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Respondents. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-32690) Submitted: November 21, 2017 Decided: January 8, 2018 Before KING, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Ju..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-6420
VINCENT MICHAEL MARINO,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
BART MASTERS, Warden, FCI McDowell,
Respondent - Appellee,
and
BUREAU OF PRISONS; DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Respondents.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:13-cv-32690)
Submitted: November 21, 2017 Decided: January 8, 2018
Before KING, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vincent Michael Marino, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Horn, Assistant United
States Attorney, Meredith George Thomas, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
Vincent Michael Marino, 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, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Marino v. Masters,
No. 1:13-cv-32690 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 6, 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
3