TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Dorothy Parrish v. Us Parole Commission, Northeast Regional Parole Commission, Ron Burkhart, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution, Alderson

Parrish v. Us Parole Comm'n, Northeast Reg'l Parole Comm'n, Ron Burkhart,, Fed. Corr. Inst., Alderson, 838 F.2d 467 (4th Cir. 1988)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
January 25, 1988
Docket
No. 87-7687
Citations
838 F.2d 4671988 WL 68531988 U.S. App. LEXIS 626
Status
Unpublished

Opinion

838 F.2d 467 Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. Dorothy PARRISH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. US PAROLE COMMISSION, Northeast Regional Parole Commission, Ron Burkhart, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution, Alderson, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 87-7687.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 25, 1987. Decided Jan. 25, 1988.

Dorothy Parrish, appellant pro se.

Amy Michelle Lecocq, Office of the United States Attorney, for appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Charles T. Cunningham, U.S. Magistrate. (C/A 86-827).

Before SPROUSE and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

A review of the record and the magistrate's opinion discloses that this appeal from its order refusing habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2241 is without merit. Because the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the record and oral argument would not significantly aid the decisional process, we dispense with oral argument and affirm the judgment below on the reasoning of the magistrate. Parrish v. United States Parole Commission, C/A No. 86-827 (S.D.W.Va. July 30, 1987).

2

AFFIRMED.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list