Narrative Opinion Summary
Charles E. Pringle, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's denial of his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Upon review, the appellate court found no reversible error and affirmed the district court’s decision for the reasons it provided. The case reference is Pringle v. Warden, No. 5:06-cv-00160-FPS-JSK (N.D.W.Va. July 9, 2008). The court opted not to hold oral arguments, indicating that the facts and legal issues were sufficiently clear in the submitted materials. The ruling is affirmed.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Review of Habeas Corpus Petitionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court reviewed the district court's denial of a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and found no reversible error, thus affirming the lower court's decision.
Reasoning: Upon review, the appellate court found no reversible error and affirmed the district court’s decision for the reasons it provided.
Oral Argument Discretionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court exercised its discretion to decide the appeal without oral arguments, as the facts and legal contentions were adequately presented in the written submissions.
Reasoning: The court opted not to hold oral arguments, indicating that the facts and legal issues were sufficiently clear in the submitted materials.