Timothy McCoy v. Kuma DeBoo
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [998737191-2] Originating case number: 2:11-cv-00076-JPB-DJJ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998793438]. Mailed to: McCoy. [11-7480]
Appeal: 11-7480
Document: 19
Date Filed: 02/22/2012
Page: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-7480
TIMOTHY WAYNE MCCOY,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
WARDEN KUMA J. DEBOO,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Elkins.
John Preston Bailey,
Chief District Judge. (2:11-cv-00076-JPB-DJJ)
Submitted:
February 16, 2012
Decided:
February 22, 2012
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy W. McCoy, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 11-7480
Document: 19
Date Filed: 02/22/2012
Page: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Wayne McCoy, a federal prisoner, appeals the
district
court’s
order
accepting
the
recommendation
of
the
magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241
(West 2006 & Supp. 2011) petition and his motion to contact
jurors.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error.
Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons
stated
by
the
district
court.
McCoy
v.
2:11-cv-00076-JPB-DJJ (N.D.W. Va. Oct. 26, 2011).
DeBoo,
No.
In addition,
we have considered McCoy’s motion to contact jurors separately
from his § 2241 petition, and we find it was correctly denied.
We deny McCoy’s motion for a transcript at Government expense.
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
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?