Walker v. Stansberry

Fourth Circuit

Walker v. Stansberry

188 F. App'x 167

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided June 26, 2006·No. No. 05-7871·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Darrius Lamont Walker, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Walker v. Stansberry, No. CA-05-499-5-H (E.D.N.C. Sept. 28, 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

PER CURIAM:

Darrius Lamont Walker, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Walker v. Stansberry, No. CA-05-499-5-H (E.D.N.C. Sept. 28, 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.

Walker v. Stansberry, 188 F. App'x 167 (4th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

188 F. App'x 167 (Walker v. Stansberry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related