Mark Fowler v. Kenny Atkinson
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999790840-2] Originating case number: 5:14-hc-02070-BO Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999919666]. Mailed to: Mark Fowler. [16-6381]
Appeal: 16-6381
Doc: 11
Filed: 08/30/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6381
MARK FOWLER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
KENNY ATKINSON,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
CRAIG APKER,
Respondent.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:14-hc-02070-BO)
Submitted:
August 25, 2016
Decided:
August 30, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mark Fowler, Appellant Pro Se. Seth Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-6381
Doc: 11
Filed: 08/30/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Mark
Fowler,
a
federal
prisoner,
appeals
the
district
court’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012)
petition and denying his motion for reconsideration.
reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
We have
Accordingly,
although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm. *
Fowler v. Atkinson, No. 5:14-hc-02070-BO (E.D.N.C. Jan. 28, 2016
& Feb. 25, 2016).
facts
and
materials
legal
before
We dispense with oral argument because the
contentions
are
adequately
this
and
argument
court
presented
would
not
in
the
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
*
To the extent that Fowler characterizes his informal brief
as a petition for writ of mandamus, mandamus is not a substitute
for appeal. United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 517 (4th
Cir. 2003).
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?