Ephraim v. Hogsten

Fourth Circuit

Ephraim v. Hogsten

647 F. App'x 217

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided April 28, 2016·No. No. 15-7789·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lionell Elijah Ephraim appeals the district court’s order and judgment adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and denying 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. Ephraim v. Hogsten, No. 1:12-cv-04701 (S.D.W.Va. Oct. 27, 2015). 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lionell Elijah Ephraim appeals the district court’s order and judgment adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and denying 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. Ephraim v. Hogsten, No. 1:12-cv-04701 (S.D.W.Va. Oct. 27, 2015). 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.

Ephraim v. Hogsten, 647 F. App'x 217 (4th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

647 F. App'x 217 (Ephraim v. Hogsten) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related