Nathaniel Pitt v. John T. Hadden
Nathaniel Pitt v. John T. Hadden
Opinion
97 F.3d 1448
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Nathaniel PITT, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
John T. HADDEN, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 96-7046.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 20, 1996.
Decided Oct. 2, 1996.
Nathaniel Pitt, Appellant Pro Se. Bruce Charles Johnson, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
E.D.N.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Pitt v. Hadden, No. CA-95-863-5-HC-F (E.D.N.C. June 24, 1996). 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.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.