Case ID: f-appx_131/html/0948-01.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

Carl A. EUBANKS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; B.G. Compton, Respondents—Appellees.
    No. 04-7199.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 19, 2005.
    Decided May 24, 2005.
    Carl A. Eubanks, Appellant pro se.
    Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Carl A. Eubanks appeals a district court order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s memorandum opinion and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. See Eubanks v. United States, No. CA-04-307 (W.D.Va. filed June 17, 2004; entered June 18, 2004). 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 
      
       To the extent that Eubanks may be seeking authorization under 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (2000) to file a second and successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion on the basis of the rules announced in United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), we deny authorization.