Outler v. Conley

Fourth Circuit

Outler v. Conley

36 F. App'x 525

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Outler v. Conley. Read the opinion of the Court — 112 F. App'x 284 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 13, 2002·No. No. 01-7974·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Raymond Outler appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have [526]*526reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Outler’s motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Outlet v. Conley, No. CA-99-213 (S.D.W.Va. Nov. 7, 2001). 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.

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM.

Raymond Outler appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have [526]*526reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Outler’s motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Outlet v. Conley, No. CA-99-213 (S.D.W.Va. Nov. 7, 2001). 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.

AFFIRMED.

Outler v. Conley, 36 F. App'x 525 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

36 F. App'x 525 (Outler v. Conley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related