Case ID: f-appx_251/html/0903-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Kevin A. WIEDERHOLD, Petitioner-Appellant v. Steve MORRIS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 06-41505
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Oct. 24, 2007.
    Kevin A. Wiederhold, Corpus Christi, TX, pro se.
    Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Kevin A. Wiederhold was convicted in a Florida federal court of one count of making a threatening telephone call, in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 223, and one count of making a harassing telephone call, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 875, and he was sentenced to a total of 37 months in prison and a three-year term of supervised release. His supervised release was revoked, and he was sentenced to nine months in prison and a 24-month term of supervised release. Wiederhold’s latter term of supervised release was also revoked, and Wiederhold was sentenced to 12 months in prison. Wiederhold appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition attacking his convictions as well as the two subsequent supervised release revocations. The district court dismissed his petition on the basis that § 2241 was not a proper vehicle for challenging his convictions and that any challenge to his supervised release revocations was moot.

Wiederhold has failed to provide any legal argument challenging the basis of the district court’s dismissal of his petition. Thus, he has failed to brief the sole issue for appeal. See Matchett v. Dretke, 380 F.3d 844, 848 (5th Cir.2004).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.