Ernest Hodges, Jr. v. Eric Wilson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999354312-2]; denying Motion for abeyance (Local Rule 12(d)) [999354315-2] Originating case number: 1:13-cv-01523-LMB-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999425012]. Mailed to: Hodges. [14-6604]

Appeal: 14-6604

Doc: 10

Filed: 08/28/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6604

ERNEST FREDERICK HODGES,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ERIC D. WILSON, Warden of FCC Petersburg,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:13-cv-01523-LMB-JFA)

Submitted:

August 25, 2014

Before WILKINSON and
Senior Circuit Judge.

DUNCAN,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

August 28, 2014

and

HAMILTON,

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ernest Frederick Hodges, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-6604

Doc: 10

Filed: 08/28/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Ernest

Frederick

Hodges,

Jr.,

a

federal

prisoner,

appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28
U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P.
59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment.

The district court

initially treated Hodges’ pleading as a successive 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2012) motion and dismissed it on that basis.

In the

order denying the motion to alter or amend the judgment, the
district

court

held

that

available under § 2241.
reversible

error.

the

relief

Hodges

seeks

is

not

We have reviewed the record and find no

Accordingly,

although

we

grant

leave

to

proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by
the district court in its order denying the Rule 59(e) motion.
Hodges v. Wilson, No. 1:13-cv-01523-LMB-JFA (E.D. Va. Feb. 12,
2014).

Hodges’

denied.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal
before

contentions
this

court

motion

to

place

are

adequately

and

argument

the

appeal

presented

would

not

in
aid

in

abeyance

the
the

is

materials
decisional

process.
AFFIRMED

2