Sutton v. Winkler

Fourth Circuit

Sutton v. Winkler

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 17, 2005

Docket04-7274

StatusUnpublished

This text of Sutton v. Winkler (Sutton v. Winkler) 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.

Bluebook

Sutton v. Winkler, (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7274

DAWN DEMPSY SUTTON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

GARY L. WINKLER,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-03-847-5-H)

Submitted: May 12, 2005 Decided: May 17, 2005

Before TRAXLER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dawn Dempsey Sutton, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Dawn Dempsey Sutton, a federal prisoner, appeals the

district court’s orders denying relief on his petition filed under

28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), and denying his motion for

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See Sutton v. Winkler, No. CA-03-847-5-H (E.D.N.C.

Apr. 22 & June 30, 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