Sams v. Gal

Fourth Circuit

Sams v. Gal

13 F. App'x 150

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided July 5, 2001·No. No. 01-6587·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Antonio Vermont Sams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court, to the extent it found that, even if Sams’ claims were not procedurally barred, they were without merit. See Sams v. Gal, No. CA-01-432-9-18RB (D.S.C. Mar. 20, 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.

Antonio Vermont Sams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court, to the extent it found that, even if Sams’ claims were not procedurally barred, they were without merit. See Sams v. Gal, No. CA-01-432-9-18RB (D.S.C. Mar. 20, 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.

Sams v. Gal, 13 F. App'x 150 (4th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

13 F. App'x 150 (Sams v. Gal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related