Filed: Sep. 24, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6699 JOHN MAURICE HENOUD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. DONNA SMITH, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-hc-02226-D) Submitted: September 20, 2019 Decided: September 24, 2019 Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinio
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6699 JOHN MAURICE HENOUD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. DONNA SMITH, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-hc-02226-D) Submitted: September 20, 2019 Decided: September 24, 2019 Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6699
JOHN MAURICE HENOUD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DONNA SMITH, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:18-hc-02226-D)
Submitted: September 20, 2019 Decided: September 24, 2019
Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John Maurice Henoud, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Maurice Henoud, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order
dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant
leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the motion for a certificate of appealability as
unnecessary and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Henoud v. Smith,
No. 5:18-hc-02226-D (E.D.N.C. May 2, 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