Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    Roberts v. Dewalt, 4th Cir. (2004)

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a federal prisoner's (Harold Dean Roberts, Jr.) appeal of a district court's denial of relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning and ruling. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Roberts v. Dewalt, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a federal prisoner's (Harold Dean Roberts, Jr.) appeal of a district court's denial of relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning and ruling. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-04-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7007

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a federal prisoner's (Harold Dean Roberts, Jr.) appeal of a district court's denial of relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning and ruling. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

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

    Roberts v. Dewalt, 4th Cir. (2004)

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a federal prisoner's (Harold Dean Roberts, Jr.) appeal of a district court's denial of relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The appeals court reviewed the record and found no reversible error, affirming the district court's reasoning and ruling. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal arguments were adequately presented in the case materials.

    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. 03-7007

    HAROLD DEAN ROBERTS, JR.,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    STEPHEN M. DEWALT,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    Malcolm J. Howard,
    District Judge. (CA-03-9-5-HO)

    Submitted:

    December 30, 2003

    Decided:

    April 2, 2004

    Before LUTTIG and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Harold Dean Roberts, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Harold Dean Roberts, Jr., a federal prisoner, appeals the
    district courts order denying relief on his petition filed under
    28 U.S.C. 2241 (2000).
    reversible error.

    We have reviewed the record and find no

    Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

    district court.

    See Roberts v. Dewalt, No. CA-03-9-5-HO (E.D.N.C.

    June 20, 2003).

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like