Butler v. Henry ( 1999 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-7665
JAMES A. BUTLER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
MARK A. HENRY, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge.
(CA-98-1810-WMN)
Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 25, 1999
Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James A. Butler, Appellant Pro Se. Albert David Copperthite, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James A. Butler appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district
court. See Butler v. Henry, No. CA-98-1810-WMN (D. Md. Oct. 28,
1998).* 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
*
Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on
October 27, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was
entered on the docket sheet on October 28, 1998. Pursuant to Rules
58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the
date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as
the effecive date of the district court’s decision. Wilson v.
Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).
2