James McCode v. Joel Ziegler
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999581087-2] Originating case number: 5:13-cv-21542 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: James McCode. [15-6651]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Plaintiff - Appellant,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia,
at Beckley. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (5:13-cv-21542)
Submitted: April 24, 2017
Decided: May 10, 2017
Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James McCode, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Horn, Assistant United States
Attorney, Meredith George Thomas, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
James McCode, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order adopting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012)
petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error in the district court’s
conclusions that McCode failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating that 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2012) is an inadequate or ineffective means of challenging the validity of his
detention and that it lacked jurisdiction over his petition. Accordingly, we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, see McCode v.
Ziegler, No. 5:13-cv-21542 (S.D. W. Va. Jan. 27, 2015), but modify the dismissal to be
without prejudice, 28 U.S.C. § 2106 (2012). We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED
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?