Filed: Feb. 26, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 09-2338 _ Rudolph George Stanko, and on * behalf of prisoners imprisoned * with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Ricardo Rios, local director/warden; * Michael K. Nelley, regional director; * [UNPUBLISHED] Harley Lappin, national director, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: February 24, 2010 Filed: February 26, 2010 _ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, an
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 09-2338 _ Rudolph George Stanko, and on * behalf of prisoners imprisoned * with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Ricardo Rios, local director/warden; * Michael K. Nelley, regional director; * [UNPUBLISHED] Harley Lappin, national director, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: February 24, 2010 Filed: February 26, 2010 _ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 09-2338
___________
Rudolph George Stanko, and on *
behalf of prisoners imprisoned *
with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* District of Minnesota.
Ricardo Rios, local director/warden; *
Michael K. Nelley, regional director; * [UNPUBLISHED]
Harley Lappin, national director, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: February 24, 2010
Filed: February 26, 2010
___________
Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Federal inmate Rudolph George Stanko appeals the district court’s1 dismissal
of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Having reviewed the record de novo, see Lopez-
1
The Honorable Joan N. Ericksen, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable Jeanne J.
Graham, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
Lopez v. Sanders,
590 F.3d 905, 907 (8th Cir. 2010), we find no basis for reversal.
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-