From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Redd v. Wilson

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Nov 21, 2017
No. 17-7266 (4th Cir. Nov. 21, 2017)

Opinion

No. 17-7266

11-21-2017

KUNTA K. REDD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ERIC WILSON, Respondent - Appellee.

Kunta K. Redd, Appellant Pro Se.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:17-cv-00393-JAG-RCY) Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and TRAXLER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kunta K. Redd, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Kunta K. Redd, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Redd has failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) is an inadequate or ineffective means of challenging the validity of his detention. See Rice v. Rivera, 617 F.3d 802, 807 (4th Cir. 2010); United States v. Poole, 531 F.3d 263, 267 n.7 (4th Cir. 2008). The district court lacked jurisdiction over Redd's petition, Rice, 617 F.3d at 807, and we therefore grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, modify the district court's order, Redd v. Wilson, No. 3:17-cv-00393-JAG-RCY (E.D. Va. Sept. 14, 2017), to reflect a dismissal without prejudice, and affirm the dismissal as modified, 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2012). We deny Redd's motion to appoint counsel and 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 AS MODIFIED


Summaries of

Redd v. Wilson

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Nov 21, 2017
No. 17-7266 (4th Cir. Nov. 21, 2017)
Case details for

Redd v. Wilson

Case Details

Full title:KUNTA K. REDD, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ERIC WILSON, Respondent …

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Nov 21, 2017

Citations

No. 17-7266 (4th Cir. Nov. 21, 2017)

Citing Cases

Smith v. Warden FCI Williamsburg

R & R at p. 5. The Fourth Circuit has recognized that such circumstances require a § 2241 petition be…

Smith v. Warden, FCI Williamsburg

R & R at p. 5. The Fourth Circuit has recognized that such circumstances require a § 2241 petition be…