Craig Andre Neal v. Warden Joyner

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis [1000217840-2] Originating case number: 0:17-cv-02352-RMG. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000311409]. Mailed to: Craig Neal. [17-7579]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-7579 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/13/2018 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-7579 CRAIG ANDRE NEAL, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN JOYNER, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (0:17-cv-02352-RMG) Submitted: April 6, 2018 Decided: June 13, 2018 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Craig Andre Neal, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 17-7579 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/13/2018 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Craig Andre Neal, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and summarily dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition seeking to challenge his mandatory minimum life sentence. The district court determined that Neal was unable to challenge his sentence under the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e) (2012). In light of our recent decision in United States v. Wheeler, No. 16-6073, __ F.3d __, 2018 WL 1514418 (4th Cir. Mar. 28, 2018), we vacate the district court’s order and remand the case for reconsideration in accordance with Wheeler. We grant Neal leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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. VACATED AND REMANDED 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?