Taylor v. Stansberry

Fourth Circuit

Taylor v. Stansberry

178 F. App'x 272

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 3, 2006·No. 05-7718·Unpublished

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

PER CURIAM:

James W. Taylor, a federal prisoner, 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 on the reasoning of the district court. See Taylor v. Stansberry, No. CA-04-678-5 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 27, 2005). 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

PER CURIAM:

James W. Taylor, a federal prisoner, 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 on the reasoning of the district court. See Taylor v. Stansberry, No. CA-04-678-5 (E.D.N.C. Sept. 27, 2005). 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

Taylor v. Stansberry, 178 F. App'x 272 (4th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

178 F. App'x 272 (Taylor v. Stansberry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related