Isbell v. Purdue

516 F. App'x 257
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedApril 1, 2013
DocketNo. 12-7943
StatusPublished

This text of 516 F. App'x 257 (Isbell v. Purdue) 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
Isbell v. Purdue, 516 F. App'x 257 (4th Cir. 2013).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Thomas J. Isbell, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider the order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West Supp.2012) petition challenging his detention. Although the district court denied relief on the merits, we conclude that Is-bell did not meet the criteria for proceeding under § 2241 in the first instance, because he failed to demonstrate that 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2012) was inadequate or ineffective to test his detention. In re Jones, 226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir.2000). Accordingly, we affirm. 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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
516 F. App'x 257, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/isbell-v-purdue-ca4-2013.