Court Opinion

ID: 990502
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 23:22:31.313582+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:37.699429
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 96-7046

NATHANIEL PITT,

                                            Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

JOHN T. HADDEN,

                                             Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District
Judge. (CA-95-863-5-HC-F)

Submitted:   September 20, 1996           Decided:   October 2, 1996

Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nathaniel Pitt, Appellant Pro Se. Bruce Charles Johnson, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Appellant appeals from 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 accepting the recom-

mendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Pitt
v. Hadden, No. CA-95-863-5-HC-F (E.D.N.C. June 24, 1996). We dis-

pense 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

                                2