Norman Alan Kerr v. Warden K. Rogers
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999945816-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999943033-2] Originating case number: 5:16-cv-00278-MGL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999975630]. Mailed to: Christopher Gibbs, Norman Alan Kerr FCI EDGEFIELD FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 725 Edgefield, SC 29824-0000. [16-7323]
Appeal: 16-7323
Doc: 7
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7323
NORMAN ALAN KERR,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN K. ROGERS,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg.
Mary G. Lewis, District Judge.
(5:16-cv-00278-MGL)
Submitted:
November 22, 2016
Before DIAZ and
Circuit Judge.
THACKER,
Circuit
Decided:
Judges,
November 28, 2016
and
DAVIS,
Senior
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Norman Alan Kerr, Appellant Pro Se.
Christopher Gibbs, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-7323
Doc: 7
Filed: 11/28/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Norman Alan Kerr, a federal prisoner, appeals the district
court’s
judge
order
and
petition.
error.
adopting
denying
the
relief
recommendation
on
his
28
of
U.S.C.
the
magistrate
§ 2241
(2012)
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court.
Kerr v. Rogers, No. 5:16-cv-00278-MGL (D.S.C.
Sept. 20, 2016).
We deny Kerr’s motion for a certificate of
appealability
unnecessary
transcript
at
as
government
and
deny
expense.
We
his
motion
dispense
for
with
a
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
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?