William Hawkins v. T. Outlaw

450 F. App'x 563
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 21, 2012
Docket11-2052
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 450 F. App'x 563 (William Hawkins v. T. Outlaw) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
William Hawkins v. T. Outlaw, 450 F. App'x 563 (8th Cir. 2012).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate William Hawkins appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. Upon careful review, see Mitchell v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 538 F.3d 948, 951 (8th Cir.2008) (per curiam) (de novo review), we conclude dismissal was proper, see Lopez-Lopez v. Sanders, 590 F.3d 905, 907 (8th Cir.2010) (defendant who wishes to collaterally attack his conviction generally must do so through 28 U.S.C. § 2255); Langella v. Anderson, 612 F.3d 938, 940-41 (8th Cir.2010) (decision whether to grant or deny parole is one Congress has committed to agency discretion and court has limited jurisdiction to review agency decisions).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Billy Roy Wilson, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Joe Volpe, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Faul v. Lejeune
D. Minnesota, 2024

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
450 F. App'x 563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-hawkins-v-t-outlaw-ca8-2012.