# Brown v. Beeler

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · March 27, 2003 · 62 F. App'x 458

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1010140

## Case

- **Full name:** Ricardo BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Arthur F. BEELER, Warden, F.M.C. Butner, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 27, 2003
- **Citations:** 62 F. App'x 458
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Williams, Traxler, Hamilton
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1010140

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7896

RICARDO BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ARTHUR F. BEELER, Warden, F.M.C. Butner, North
Carolina,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District
Judge. (CA-02-HC-545-5-H)

Submitted: March 20, 2003 Decided: March 27, 2003

Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ricardo Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

Ricardo Brown, a federal prisoner, appeals the district

court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny Brown’s motions for a writ of habeas

corpus and oral argument, and affirm the dismissal of his petition

for the reasons stated by the district court. See Brown v. Beeler,

No. CA-02-HC-545-5-H (E.D.N.C., filed Sept. 11, 2002; entered

Sept. 12, 2002). 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

2

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1010140. Public record. Not legal advice.