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)
02-7653•Paul B. Goist v. United States Bureau of Prisons
02-7653Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 7, 2003
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7653
PAUL B. GOIST,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS; JOHN DOE;
JANE DOE; STATUTORY AGENT OFFICERS; DAN DOVE,
Warden of Edgefield Federal Correctional
Institution,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-02-2211-0-20-BD)
Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: January 7, 2003
Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paul B. Goist, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Paul B. Goist, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the
district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the
magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief on his
petition that it construed as filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000).
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See Goist v. United States Bureau of Prisons, No. CA-02-
2211-0-20-BD (D.S.C. Sept. 25, 2002). 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.