Filed: Jun. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7552 ALESSANDRO TALONI, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BRICK TRIPP; W. BRANCH, Respondents - Appellees. 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-02089-D) Submitted: May 21, 2018 Decided: June 1, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, WYNN, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam op
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7552 ALESSANDRO TALONI, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BRICK TRIPP; W. BRANCH, Respondents - Appellees. 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-02089-D) Submitted: May 21, 2018 Decided: June 1, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, WYNN, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-7552
ALESSANDRO TALONI,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
BRICK TRIPP; W. BRANCH,
Respondents - Appellees.
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-02089-D)
Submitted: May 21, 2018 Decided: June 1, 2018
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, WYNN, Circuit Judge, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Alessandro Taloni, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Alessandro Taloni, 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. Taloni v. Tripp, No. 5:16-hc-02089-D
(E.D.N.C. Nov. 13, 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