Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Enoc Alcantara-Mendez v. Sara Revell, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a federal prisoner's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 habeas corpus petition without prejudice and denial of his motion for reconsideration. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders from February 15 and May 22, 2012. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-11-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-6979

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a federal prisoner's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 habeas corpus petition without prejudice and denial of his motion for reconsideration. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders from February 15 and May 22, 2012. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    0 views2 pages

    Enoc Alcantara-Mendez v. Sara Revell, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a federal prisoner's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 habeas corpus petition without prejudice and denial of his motion for reconsideration. The appellate court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's rulings for the reasons stated in its orders from February 15 and May 22, 2012. The appellate court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues adequately presented.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 12-6979

    ENOC ALCANTARA-MENDEZ,
    Petitioner Appellant,
    v.
    SARA
    M.
    REVELL,
    Warden
    of
    RODRIGUEZ-VELEZ, U.S. Attorney,

    FMC

    Butner;

    ROSA

    E.

    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    James C. Dever III,
    Chief District Judge. (5:11-hc-02101-D)

    Submitted:

    October 31, 2012

    Decided:

    November 8, 2012

    Before GREGORY, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Enoc Alcantara-Mendez, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Enoc Alcantara-Mendez, a federal prisoner, appeals the
    district courts orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C.A. 2241 (West
    2006

    &

    Supp.

    2012)

    reconsideration.
    reversible

    petition

    We

    error.

    have

    without

    reviewed

    Accordingly,

    prejudice

    the

    record

    although

    we

    and
    and

    grant

    denying
    find

    no

    leave

    to

    proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by


    the

    district

    court.

    Alcantara-Mendez

    v.

    Revell,

    5:11-hc-02101-D (E.D.N.C. Feb. 15 & May 22, 2012).

    No.

    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

    You might also like