Damon Elliott v. Eric Wilson, No. 15-7301 (4th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on November 20, 2015.

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-7301 DAMON ELLIOTT, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ERIC D. WILSON, Respondent - Appellee. No. 16-6501 DAMON ELLIOTT, Petitioner - Appellant, v. ERIC D. WILSON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:14-cv-00209-LO-JFA) Submitted: September 27, 2016 Decided: Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. September 28, 2016 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Damon Elliott, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: In No. 15-7301, Damon Elliott, a federal inmate, appeals the district court’s order construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion, and denying relief on that basis. We remanded for the limited purpose of permitting the district court to determine whether Elliott’s notice of appeal should be construed as a motion to reopen the merited. to appeal period, and if so, whether reopening was On remand, the district court granted Elliott’s motion reopen. In No. 16-6501, Elliott appeals this subsequent order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Elliott’s motion for the appointment of counsel in No. 15-7301, grant his motions to proceed in forma pauperis, court. and affirm for the reasons stated by the district Elliott v. Wilson, No. 1:14-cv-00209-LO-JFA (E.D. Va. filed Feb. 10, 2015 & entered Feb. 23, 2015; filed Mar. 14, 2016 & entered Mar. 15, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.