Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Sean Hagins v. S. Kallis, 19-6424 (2019)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 19-6424 Visitors: 17
Filed: Jul. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6424 SEAN L. HAGINS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. S. KALLIS, FCI Warden, Respondent - Appellee.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. (5:17-cv-00021-FPS) Submitted: July 16, 2019 Decided: July 19, 2019 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sean L. Hagins, Appellant
More
                                    UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 19-6424


SEAN L. HAGINS,

                    Petitioner - Appellant,

             v.

S. KALLIS, FCI 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. (5:17-cv-00021-FPS)


Submitted: July 16, 2019                                          Decided: July 19, 2019


Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.


Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Sean L. Hagins, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Sean L. Hagins, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing 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. Hagins v. Kallis, No. 5:17-cv-00021-FPS (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 19, 2019).

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