Smith v. Stansberry
This text of Smith v. Stansberry (Smith v. Stansberry) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7906
WILLIAM COLUMBUS SMITH,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (CA-04-557-5-FL)
Submitted: April 14, 2005 Decided: April 20, 2005
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William Columbus Smith, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
William C. Smith appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000).
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Smith v. Stansberry, No. CA-04-557-5-FL (E.D.N.C.
Oct. 28, 2004). 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
- 2 -
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Smith v. Stansberry, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-stansberry-ca4-2005.