In re Williams

Fourth Circuit

In re Williams

306 F. App'x 818

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 15, 2009

DocketNo. 08-2217

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 306 F. App'x 818 (In re Williams) 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

In re Williams, 306 F. App'x 818 (4th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Gary B. Williams, a federal pretrial detainee, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with this court pursuant to 28 [819]*819U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). In the petition, Williams alleges that he was illegally arrested and is being unlawfully detained, he is being denied access to the courts, and his right to a speedy trial has been violated. He seeks immediate release from custody and other relief. Upon review, we conclude that Williams is not entitled to the relief sought. Moreover, Williams may assert his claims in pretrial proceedings in his pending criminal case. See United States v. Williams, No. 4:08-cr-00087-RGD-FBS-l (E.D. Va.). Accordingly, we dismiss Williams’ petition. 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.

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

PER CURIAM:

Gary B. Williams, a federal pretrial detainee, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with this court pursuant to 28 [819]*819U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). In the petition, Williams alleges that he was illegally arrested and is being unlawfully detained, he is being denied access to the courts, and his right to a speedy trial has been violated. He seeks immediate release from custody and other relief. Upon review, we conclude that Williams is not entitled to the relief sought. Moreover, Williams may assert his claims in pretrial proceedings in his pending criminal case. See United States v. Williams, No. 4:08-cr-00087-RGD-FBS-l (E.D. Va.). Accordingly, we dismiss Williams’ petition. 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 F. App'x 818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-williams-ca4-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack