Felix v. Pendergrass

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: September 12, 2002
• Docket: 02-6557
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6557

DANNY FELIX,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

LINDY PENDERGRASS; UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge. (CA-01-449-1)

Submitted: August 29, 2002 Decided: September 12, 2002

Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Danny Felix, Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Danny Felix appeals the district court’s order denying relief

on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and conclude that Felix has

not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.* See Felix v. Pendergrass, No. CA-01-449-1 (M.D.N.C. Mar.

25, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

* We note Felix’s objections to the report of the magistrate judge were timely under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2000). We have considered the objections and the points raised in Felix’s informal brief to this court in reaching our decision.