Filed: Jan. 09, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: AMENDED DLD-095 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _ No. 13-4166 _ IN RE: LEOTIS FOWLER, Petitioner _ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to D.C. Civ. No. 13-cv-03137) _ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. December 5, 2013 Before: SMITH, HARDIMAN and VAN ANTWERPEN, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: January 9, 2014) _ OPINION _ PER CURIAM In April 2013, petitioner Leotis Fowler
Summary: AMENDED DLD-095 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _ No. 13-4166 _ IN RE: LEOTIS FOWLER, Petitioner _ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to D.C. Civ. No. 13-cv-03137) _ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. December 5, 2013 Before: SMITH, HARDIMAN and VAN ANTWERPEN, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: January 9, 2014) _ OPINION _ PER CURIAM In April 2013, petitioner Leotis Fowler f..
More
AMENDED DLD-095 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 13-4166
___________
IN RE: LEOTIS FOWLER,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
(Related to D.C. Civ. No. 13-cv-03137)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
December 5, 2013
Before: SMITH, HARDIMAN and VAN ANTWERPEN, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: January 9, 2014)
_________
OPINION
_________
PER CURIAM
In April 2013, petitioner Leotis Fowler filed a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking a “prompt
supervise[d] release revocation hearing.” That Court, recognizing that the sentencing court
retains jurisdiction to modify or revoke supervised release, transferred the petition to the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, the jurisdiction in which the
sentence was imposed. In an order entered May 20, 2013, the matter was administratively
terminated for failure to pay the filing fee or to file a completed in forma pauperis application.
A review of the docket sheet indicates that the order that was sent to Fowler was returned as
undeliverable, apparently because it was sent to the wrong address.1
Fowler, unaware that an order had been entered in the case, filed the instant mandamus
petition, alleging delay in the adjudication of his habeas petition and seeking an order directing
the District Court to rule in the matter. Since the filing of this petition, Fowler has received a
copy of the District Court’s order. Because Fowler has received the relief he requested in his
mandamus petition, we will deny the mandamus petition as moot. The motion for a refund of
the filing fee is granted.
1
Fowler is incarcerated at FCI-Otisville, in Otisville, New York. His correct address is
indicated on the docket, as well as in his habeas petition. Inexplicably, however, the District
Court noted in its order that Fowler was located in FCI-Schuykill in Minersville, Pennsylvania.
2