Frederick Banks v. Dr. Allissa Marquez, et al
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000058033-2] Originating case number: 5:17-ct-03064-F Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Frederick Hamilton Banks. [17-6387]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Petitioner - Appellant,
DR. ALLISSA MARQUEZ; DR. LOGAN GRADDY; DR. CAHILL; MARK
HORNAK; U.S. DISTRICT COURT, Western District of Pennsylvania; JEFF
SESSIONS; DIRECTOR OF BUREAU OF PRISONS; ADRIAN ROE; ROBERT
CESSAR; SOO SONG,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:17-ct-03064-F)
Submitted: July 27, 2017
Decided: August 1, 2017
Before AGEE and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Frederick Hamilton Banks, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
Frederick Banks appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice
what the district court construed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. In his petition,
Banks sought immediate release from custody or, in the least, that his competency
proceedings be conducted. Banks explicitly admitted in his petition that he failed to
exhaust his administrative remedies and, thus, we discern no error in the district court’s
decision to sua sponte dismiss Banks’ petition for failure to administratively exhaust. See
Custis v. Davis, 851 F.3d 358, 361-63 (4th Cir. 2017) (holding that a court may sua
sponte dismiss an inmate’s complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies only
if failure to exhaust is apparent on the face of the complaint and the district court did not
first require the inmate to substantiate exhaustion).
Accordingly, we grant Banks’
application to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the district court’s judgment. 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
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?