Sheppard v. Warden of FCI Estill

Fourth Circuit

Sheppard v. Warden of FCI Estill

441 F. App'x 980

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 2, 2011·No. No. 11-6633·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Bradley Shane Sheppard, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2011) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sheppard v. Warden of FCI-Estill, No.. 1:10-cv-03220-RMG, 2011 WL 1258556 (D.S.C. Apr. 5, 2011). 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

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Bradley Shane Sheppard, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2011) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Sheppard v. Warden of FCI-Estill, No.. 1:10-cv-03220-RMG, 2011 WL 1258556 (D.S.C. Apr. 5, 2011). 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.

Sheppard v. Warden of FCI Estill, 441 F. App'x 980 (4th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

441 F. App'x 980 (Sheppard v. Warden of FCI Estill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related