Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

    Henderson v. Bidwell, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Darren Henderson's § 2241 habeas petition and motion for reconsideration. The court reviewed the record and district court opinions and found no reversible error. It affirmed the lower court's rulings that denied Henderson relief for the reasons stated in its opinions dated October 24, 31, and November 12, 1997. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Henderson v. Bidwell, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Darren Henderson's § 2241 habeas petition and motion for reconsideration. The court reviewed the record and district court opinions and found no reversible error. It affirmed the lower court's rulings that denied Henderson relief for the reasons stated in its opinions dated October 24, 31, and November 12, 1997. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1998-05-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-7659

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Darren Henderson's § 2241 habeas petition and motion for reconsideration. The court reviewed the record and district court opinions and found no reversible error. It affirmed the lower court's rulings that denied Henderson relief for the reasons stated in its opinions dated October 24, 31, and November 12, 1997. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    6 views2 pages

    Henderson v. Bidwell, 4th Cir. (1998)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of Darren Henderson's § 2241 habeas petition and motion for reconsideration. The court reviewed the record and district court opinions and found no reversible error. It affirmed the lower court's rulings that denied Henderson relief for the reasons stated in its opinions dated October 24, 31, and November 12, 1997. The court dispensed with oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately explained in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-7659

    DARREN HENDERSON,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    DENNIS BIDWELL, Warden; UNITED STATES BUREAU
    OF PRISONS,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.
    (CA-97-2521-WMN)
    Submitted:

    April 29, 1998

    Decided:

    May 14, 1998

    Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Darren Brett Henderson, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia,
    United States Attorney, Larry David Adams, Assistant United States
    Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's orders denying relief
    on his 28 U.S.C. 2241 (1994) petition, and denying his motion
    for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district
    court's opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Henderson v. Bidwell,
    No. CA-97-2521-WMN (D. Md. Oct. 24,

    31, and Nov. 12, 1997). 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

    You might also like