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)
03-7439•Terrence Braxton v. JOSEPH BROOKS, Warden
03-7439Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitFeb 6, 2004
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7439
TERRENCE BRAXTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
JOSEPH BROOKS, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District
Judge. (CA-03-63-2)
Submitted: January 29, 2004 Decided: February 6, 2004
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Terrence Braxton, Appellant Pro Se. Laurie Marie Everhart, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Terrence Braxton appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
reasons stated by the district court. See Braxton v. Brooks, No.
CA-03-63-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 2, 2003). 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.