The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
01-6878•Bernard S. Levi v. Ray, No. CA-00-2318-2-24 D.S.C. filed Apr. 25, 2001
01-6878Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJul 12, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-6878
BERNARD S. LEVI,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
M. E. RAY, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
(CA-00-2318-2-24)
Submitted: June 26, 2002 Decided: July 12, 2002
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bernard S. Levi, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Bernard S. Levi appeals the district court’s orders denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition and denying
reconsideration of that order. We have reviewed the record and the
district court’s order accepting with modification the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Levi v. Ray, No. CA-00-2318-2-24 (D.S.C. filed Apr. 25,
2001; entered Apr. 27, 2002 & filed Jan. 22, 2002; entered Jan. 24,
2002). We deny Levi’s motion for a temporary restraining order and
a preliminary injunction, and his motion for correction of the
district court’s docket entry. 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 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.