Narrative Opinion Summary
Frank L. Hinton, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court’s order that adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, denying relief on his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Upon review, the appellate court found no reversible error and affirmed the district court's decision, citing the reasons provided by both the district court and the magistrate judge. The citation for the original case is Hinton v. Warden, USP Hazelton, No. 2:09-cv-00096-REM-JES, 2009 WL 3762306 (N.D.W.Va. Nov. 9, 2009). The court opted not to hold oral argument, concluding that the existing records sufficiently presented the relevant facts and legal issues. The decision was affirmed without further elaboration.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Review of District Court Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court reviews the district court's order for reversible error and affirms the decision if no such error is found.
Reasoning: Upon review, the appellate court found no reversible error and affirmed the district court's decision, citing the reasons provided by both the district court and the magistrate judge.
Denial of Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: A petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 can be denied if the magistrate judge's report and the district court's adoption of that report are found to be without reversible error.
Reasoning: Frank L. Hinton, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court’s order that adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, denying relief on his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Sufficiency of Record for Appellate Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court can decide not to hold oral arguments if the written record adequately presents the facts and legal issues.
Reasoning: The court opted not to hold oral argument, concluding that the existing records sufficiently presented the relevant facts and legal issues.