Anton Johnson v. Charles Ratledge
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999717908-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999702819-2] Originating case number: 5:14-hc-02250-BO Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999799971]. Mailed to: Anton Johnson. [15-7731]
Appeal: 15-7731
Doc: 12
Filed: 04/21/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-7731
ANTON JOHNSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
CHARLES RATLEDGE, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:14-hc-02250-BO)
Submitted:
April 19, 2016
Decided:
April 21, 2016
Before AGEE, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anton Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 15-7731
Doc: 12
Filed: 04/21/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Anton Johnson, a District of Columbia Code offender civilly
committed under the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act,
18
U.S.C.
§ 4248
(2012),
appeals
the
district
court’s
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition.
reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
order
We have
Accordingly,
although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm
for
the
reasons
stated
by
the
district
court.
Johnson
v.
Ratledge, No. 5:14-hc-02250-BO (E.D.N.C. filed Oct. 19, 2015;
entered Oct. 20, 2015).
counsel is denied.
facts
and
materials
legal
before
Johnson’s motion for appointment of
We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions
are
adequately
this
and
argument
court
presented
would
not
in
the
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?