Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

CHARLES EDWARD COMPTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent-Appellee.

No. (D.C. No. ) ()

Before BRORBY, PORFILIO, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Charles Edward Compton filed this pro se habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to contest the validity of a parole violator sentence imposed by the United States Parole Commission. In a detailed and cogent order, the district court denied the petition and dismissed the action, and Mr. Compton appealed. We have carefully considered the record and the parties' legal arguments, and for substantially the same reasons set out in the district court order dated January 31, 2000, we AFFIRM.

Entered for the Court

Circuit Judge

This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.