From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Strouse v. Wilson

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jun 3, 2014
575 F. App'x 115 (4th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 14-6423

06-03-2014

JAMES STROUSE, Petitioner - Appellant, v. E. D. WILSON, Warden; BERNARDO, SIS; LAGRONE, SIS; BLACKBURN, Counselor; BENNETT, DHO; HOLDERFIELD, SIS, Respondents - Appellees, and BUREAU OF PRISONS; KEVIN KIDDY, Unit Manager; MENDEZ, SIS; GENTRY, SIS, Respondents.

James Strouse, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:12-cv-00653-REP) Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Strouse, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

James Strouse, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. 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. Strouse v. Wilson, No. 3:12-cv-00653-REP (E.D. Va. Mar. 4, 2014). 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


Summaries of

Strouse v. Wilson

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jun 3, 2014
575 F. App'x 115 (4th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

Strouse v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:JAMES STROUSE, Petitioner - Appellant, v. E. D. WILSON, Warden; BERNARDO…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jun 3, 2014

Citations

575 F. App'x 115 (4th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

Strouse v. Wilson

Strouse clearly intended for his § 2241 Petition to address only "INCIDENT REPORT #2392460" (id. at 1; see…

Mathews v. Heckard

To the extent Petitioner argues that he could not timely appeal the DHO/CDC Report because Petitioner was not…