Case ID: f-appx_22/html/0228-01.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

Hugh MINGO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dan L. DOVE, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 01-7678.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 28, 2001.
    Decided Dec. 5, 2001.
    Hugh Mingo, pro se.
    Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Hugh Mingo appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Mingo v. Dove, No. CA-01-2764-2-18AJ (D.S.C. Aug. 21, 2001). 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.