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)
08-7618•Charles E. Pringle v. Warden, United States Penitentiary Hazelton
08-7618Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJan 22, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7618
CHARLES E. PRINGLE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN, UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY HAZELTON,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; US PAROLE COMMISSION;
USP HAZELTON,
Respondents.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp,
Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:06-cv-00160-FPS-JSK)
Submitted: January 15, 2009 Decided: January 22, 2009
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles E. Pringle, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel W. Dickinson, Jr.,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Betsy C. Jividen,
-- 1 of 3 --
Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
-- 2 of 3 --
3
PER CURIAM:
Charles E. Pringle, a federal prisoner, appeals the
district court’s order denying relief on 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. Pringle v. Warden, No. 5:06-cv-00160-
FPS-JSK (N.D.W. Va. July 9, 2008). 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 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.