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)
04-7274•Dawn Dempsy Sutton v. Gary L. Winkler
04-7274Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMay 17, 2005
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7274
DAWN DEMPSY SUTTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
GARY L. WINKLER,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard,
District Judge. (CA-03-847-5-H)
Submitted: May 12, 2005 Decided: May 17, 2005
Before TRAXLER, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dawn Dempsey Sutton, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Dawn Dempsey Sutton, a federal prisoner, appeals the
district court’s orders denying relief on his petition filed under
28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), and denying his motion for
reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the
district court. See Sutton v. Winkler, No. CA-03-847-5-H (E.D.N.C.
Apr. 22 & June 30, 2004). 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.