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)
14-6604•Ernest Frederick Hodges v. ERIC D. WILSON, Warden of FCC Petersburg
14-6604Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitAug 28, 2014
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6604
ERNEST FREDERICK HODGES,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ERIC D. WILSON, Warden of FCC Petersburg,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:13-cv-01523-LMB-JFA)
Submitted: August 25, 2014 Decided: August 28, 2014
Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ernest Frederick Hodges, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Ernest Frederick Hodges, Jr., a federal prisoner,
appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28
U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P.
59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment. The district court
initially treated Hodges’ pleading as a successive 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2012) motion and dismissed it on that basis. In the
order denying the motion to alter or amend the judgment, the
district court held that the relief Hodges seeks is not
available under § 2241. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court in its order denying the Rule 59(e) motion.
Hodges v. Wilson, No. 1:13-cv-01523-LMB-JFA (E.D. Va. Feb. 12,
2014). Hodges’ motion to place the appeal in abeyance is
denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.