United States of America v. Ronald Lanthron

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7596
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RONALD LANTHRON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 02-6002
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RONALD LANTHRON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief
District Judge. (CA-01-465-5-BO)

-- 1 of 3 --

2
Submitted: February 28, 2002 Decided: March 13, 2002
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Lanthron, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 2 of 3 --

3
PER CURIAM:
On consolidated appeals, Ronald Lanthron seeks to appeal the
district court’s orders denying his motion, filed on a form per-
taining to motions under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001), but
that we construe as a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241
(1994). He also challenges the district court’s order denying his
motion for a certificate of appealability. Because Lanthron’s
challenge to a court martial is properly addressed under § 2241,
Burns v. Wilson, 346 U.S. 137 (1953), the district court erred in
dismissing the petition based on the time limits applicable to
motions under § 2255. However, as the district court correctly
noted in its denial of Lanthron’s motion for a certificate of
appealability, Lanthron did not meet the custody requirement
applicable to habeas corpus petitions. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3); see
Garlotte v. Fordice, 515 U.S. 39, 40 (1995). Accordingly, we
affirm the denial of relief on the basis that Lanthron was not in
custody, depriving the district court of jurisdiction over the
petition. We grant Lanthron’s motion to supplement the record. 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 --