Case ID: f-appx_75/html/0197-01.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

Paul M. OMAR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Joseph BROOKS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 03-6699.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 11, 2003.
    Decided Sept. 17, 2003.
    Paul M. Omar, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Hannah Lauck, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Paul M. Omar, a federal prisoner, appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Omar v. Brooks, No. CA-02-561 (E.D.Va. Apr. 18, 2003). 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. 
      
       The parties consented to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).