Smith v. Hollingsworth

Fourth Circuit

Smith v. Hollingsworth

392 F. App'x 234

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided August 18, 2010·No. No. 09-8039·Published

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Benjamin Smith, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2010) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Smith v. Hollingsworth, No. 1:08-cv-03166-RDB (D.Md. Sept. 17, 2009). 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:

Benjamin Smith, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2010) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Smith v. Hollingsworth, No. 1:08-cv-03166-RDB (D.Md. Sept. 17, 2009). 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.

Smith v. Hollingsworth, 392 F. App'x 234 (4th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

392 F. App'x 234 (Smith v. Hollingsworth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related