United States v. Clifton
Opinion
James E. Clifton appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition challenging the computation of his sentence for failure to provide evidence of exhaustion of administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the rea *121 soning of the district court. * See United States v. Clifton, No. CR-75-84-A (E.D. Va. June 20, 2000). 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.
To the extent that Clifton seeks to receive credit toward his federal sentence for time spent in state custody for state court convictions which caused his federal parole to be repeatedly revoked, we note that the district court and this court have ruled against Clifton on this issue in the context of a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. See Clifton v. United States Parole Comm’n, No. 98-6527, 1998 WL 454749 (4th Cir. July 29, 1998) (unpublished).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James E. CLIFTON, Defendant-Appellant
- Status
- Unpublished