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)
09-7187•David Karl Danser v. Warden Stansberry
09-7187Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitNov 23, 2009
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-7187
DAVID KARL DANSER,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
WARDEN STANSBERRY,
Respondent – Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District
Judge. (2:07-cv-00271-JBF-TEM)
Submitted: November 17, 2009 Decided: November 23, 2009
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Karl Danser, Appellant Pro Se. Joel Eric Wilson,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
David Karl Danser, a federal prisoner, appeals the
district court’s order denying his motion to reopen his
previously dismissed 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2006) petition. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See
Danser v. Stansberry, No. 2:07-cv-00271-JBF-TEM (E.D. Va. Apr.
16, 2009). 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.