Francis Davis v. Warden Brown

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 19, 2023
Docket23-6757
StatusUnpublished

This text of Francis Davis v. Warden Brown (Francis Davis v. Warden Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Francis Davis v. Warden Brown, (4th Cir. 2023).

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6757 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/19/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6757

FRANCIS CURTIS DAVIS, a/k/a Abdul-Malik Francis As-Salafi,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN BROWN,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:23-cv-00173-JPB-JPM)

Submitted: October 3, 2023 Decided: October 19, 2023

Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Abdul-Malik Francis As-Salafi, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6757 Doc: 9 Filed: 10/19/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Francis Curtis Davis, a/k/a Abdul-Malik Francis As-Salafi, a federal prisoner,

appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which he

challenged the execution of his sentence, for failure to exhaust alternative remedies. We

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Timms v. Johns, 627 F.3d 525,

530-31 (4th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order, see Davis v.

Brown, No. 5:23-cv-00173-JPB-JPM (N.D.W. Va. July 26, 2023), but we modify the

dismissal to be without prejudice, see 28 U.S.C. § 2106; Timms, 627 F.3d at 533. We deny

the motion for bond or release pending appeal as moot. 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 AS MODIFIED

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

Related

Timms v. Johns
627 F.3d 525 (Fourth Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Francis Davis v. Warden Brown, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francis-davis-v-warden-brown-ca4-2023.