Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
05-6432•Richard Morris v. Patricia Stansbery
05-6432Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit26.08.2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6432
RICHARD MORRIS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
PATRICIA STANSBERY,
Respondent - Appellee,
and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; UNITED STATES PAROLE
COMMISSION,
Respondents.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (CA-04-147-5-BO)
Submitted: August 17, 2005 Decided: August 26, 2005
Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Richard Morris, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant
United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
-- 1 of 3 --
- 2 -
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 2 of 3 --
- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Richard Morris, a federal parolee, appeals the district
court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Morris v. Stansbery, No. CA-04-147-5-BO (E.D.N.C.
Feb. 9, 2005). 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
-- 3 of 3 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.