In re: Tyrone Robinson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999948647-2]; denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999958410-2]; dismissing Motion for writ of habeas corpus (FRAP 21) filed by Petitioner Tyrone Lorenzo Robinson [999948640-2], dismissing Motion for writ of habeas corpus (FRAP 21) filed by Petitioner Tyrone Lorenzo Robinson [999974816-2], dismissing Motion for writ of habeas corpus (FRAP 21) filed by Petitioner Tyrone Lorenzo Robinson [999958414-2] Originating case number: Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000015911]. Mailed to: Tyrone Lorenzo Robinson. [16-2197]

Appeal: 16-2197

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/02/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-2197

In re:

TYRONE LORENZO ROBINSON,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Submitted:

January 31, 2017

Decided:

February 2, 2017

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone Lorenzo Robinson, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-2197

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/02/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Robinson filed a petition for an original writ of
habeas corpus challenging his South Carolina convictions.

This

court ordinarily declines to entertain original habeas corpus
petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012), and this case provides
no reason to depart from the general rule.

Moreover, we find

that the interest of justice would not be served by transferring
the case to the district court.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1631 (2012).

Accordingly,

leave

pauperis,

we

deny

deny
his

Robinson

motion

for

to

proceed

appointment

of

in

forma

counsel,

and

dismiss the petition, amended petition, emergency petition, and
all pending petitions.
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.

DISMISSED

2