Case ID: f-appx_423/html/0328-01.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

Gary Dean WALLACE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Larry W. JARVIS, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 10-7188.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 14, 2011.
    Decided: April 11, 2011.
    Gary Dean Wallace, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Gary Dean Wallace seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find Wallace’s appeal is moot. While Wallace challenges the calculation of his release date, he has been released from custody, and he does not allege any collateral consequences that would warrant relief. See Lane v. Williams, 455 U.S. 624, 631, 102 S.Ct. 1322, 71 L.Ed.2d 508 (1982) (habeas petitions were moot after prisoners’ sentences expired and prisoners had attacked only their sentences); see also North Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244, 248, 92 S.Ct. 402, 30 L.Ed.2d 413 (1971) (per curiam) (“Nullification of a conviction may have important benefits for a defendant ... but urging in a habeas corpus proceeding the correction of a sentence already served is another matter.”).

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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 in the deci-sional process.

DISMISSED.