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)
01-7930•Anthony Bernard Lee v. STEPHEN GAL, Warden
01-7930Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 27, 2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-7930
ANTHONY BERNARD LEE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
STEPHEN GAL, Warden; UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
United States Attorney for the District of
South Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District
Judge. (CA-00-2409-2-23)
Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 27, 2002
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony Bernard Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Bernard Lee appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recom-
mendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See
Lee v. Gal, No. CA-00-2409-2-23 (D.S.C. Sept. 27, 2001). 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.