Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 0 views

    Graves v. Hollingsworth, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Scott Lee Graves, a state prisoner, filed a §2241 petition against prison officials challenging their denial of his participation in a drug treatment program. The district court denied relief and Graves appealed. The Fourth Circuit affirmed, finding no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Graves v. Hollingsworth, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    Scott Lee Graves, a state prisoner, filed a §2241 petition against prison officials challenging their denial of his participation in a drug treatment program. The district court denied relief and Graves appealed. The Fourth Circuit affirmed, finding no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-06-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-6380

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Scott Lee Graves, a state prisoner, filed a §2241 petition against prison officials challenging their denial of his participation in a drug treatment program. The district court denied relief and Graves appealed. The Fourth Circuit affirmed, finding no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    Copyright:

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

    Graves v. Hollingsworth, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Scott Lee Graves, a state prisoner, filed a §2241 petition against prison officials challenging their denial of his participation in a drug treatment program. The district court denied relief and Graves appealed. The Fourth Circuit affirmed, finding no reversible error in the district court's decision. The appeals court dispensed with oral argument, stating that the facts and legal issues were adequately presented to the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    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. 07-6380

    SCOTT LEE GRAVES,


    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    LISA HOLLINGSWORTH, Warden; ALEXA MATASON,
    RDAP Coordinator; LEONARD WEBB, Drug Treatment
    Specialist,
    Defendants - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:06-cv00002036-RWT)

    Submitted: May 31, 2007

    Decided:

    June 8, 2007

    Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Scott Lee Graves, Appellant Pro Se. Larry David Adams, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Scott Lee Graves, a state prisoner, appeals the district
    courts order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2241 (2000)
    petition.
    error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no reversible


    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

    district court.

    Graves v. Hollingsworth, No. 8:06-cv-00002036-RWT

    (D. Md. Feb. 22, 2007).


    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 2 -

    You might also like