Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4 views

    Zawadzki v. O'Brien, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Jason Zawadzki, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2241. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Zawadzki's petition for the reasons stated in the district court's opinion.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Zawadzki v. O'Brien, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    1) Jason Zawadzki, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2241. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Zawadzki's petition for the reasons stated in the district court's opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-04-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7685

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Jason Zawadzki, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2241. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Zawadzki's petition for the reasons stated in the district court's opinion.

    Copyright:

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

    Zawadzki v. O'Brien, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Jason Zawadzki, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2241. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's decision. 3) The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Zawadzki's petition for the reasons stated in the district court's opinion.

    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. 09-7685

    JASON ZAWADZKI,
    Petitioner Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN TERRY OBRIEN,
    Respondent Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
    Glen E. Conrad, District
    Judge. (7:09-cv-00114-gec-mfu)

    Submitted:

    April 22, 2010

    Decided:

    April 26, 2010

    Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Jason Zawadzki, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Linn Eckert, Assistant


    United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Jason

    Zawadzki,

    federal

    prisoner,

    appeals

    the

    district courts order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. 2241 (2006)


    petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
    record and find no reversible error.

    We have reviewed the

    Accordingly, we affirm for

    the reasons stated by the district court.

    Zawadzki v. OBrien,

    No. 7:09-cv-00114-gec-mfu (W.D. Va. Aug. 20, 2009).

    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