Case ID: f-appx_670/html/0094-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jerome CAPELTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 15-6021
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: September 22, 2016
    Decided: October 26, 2016
    
      Jerome Capelton, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before KEENAN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jerome Capelton, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. “[W]e may affirm a district court’s ruling on any ground apparent in the record,” United States ex rel. Drakeford v. Tuomey, 792 F.3d 364, 375 (4th Cir. 2015), and we may take judicial notice of court records, see City of Charleston v. A Fisherman’s Best, Inc., 310 F.3d 155, 172 (4th Cir. 2002). The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has recently noted that Ca-pelton has three predicate convictions for controlled substance offenses supporting his career offender status. Capelton v. United States, No. 15-2163 (1st Cir. Nov. 30, 2015). Thus, even assuming Capelton may successfully challenge his predicate larceny conviction in a § 2241 proceeding, he would remain a career offender based on the convictions identified by the First Circuit, and he would be entitled to no relief. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Capelton v. Warden, No. 6:14-cv-01997-RBH (D.S.C. Nov. 18, 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