Crawford v. Brooks ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7577
CURTIS E. CRAWFORD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
JOSEPH M. BROOKS,
Respondent - Appellee,
and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Party in Interest.
No. 04-7578
CURTIS E. CRAWFORD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; REGIONAL
DIRECTOR FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; JOSEPH M.
BROOKS, Petersburg FCI Medium,
Respondents - Appellees.
No. 04-7579
CURTIS E. CRAWFORD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
JOSEPH M. BROOKS, Warden; CHAIRMAN, UNITED
STATES PAROLE COMMISSION; DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BOARD OF PAROLE,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
Judge. (CA-04-61; CA-03-472; CA-04-59)
Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: December 1, 2004
Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Curtis E. Crawford, Appellant Pro Se. George Maralan Kelley, III,
Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Curtis E. Crawford appeals the district court’s orders
accepting the recommendations of the magistrate judge and denying
as moot his petitions filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have
reviewed the records and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See
Crawford v. Brooks, No. CA-04-61 (E.D. Va. Sept. 21, 2004);
Crawford v. Dir., Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. CA-03-472 (E.D. Va.
Sept. 21, 2004); Crawford v. Brooks, No. CA-04-59 (E.D. Va. Sept.
21, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -