In Re: Powell v., 04-6624 (2004)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 04-6624
Visitors: 49
Filed: May 20, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6624 In Re: FLOYD JUNIOR “DICK” POWELL, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (CA-02-138) Submitted: May 13, 2004 Decided: May 20, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Floyd Junior “Dick” Powell, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Floyd Junior “Dick” Powell petition
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6624 In Re: FLOYD JUNIOR “DICK” POWELL, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (CA-02-138) Submitted: May 13, 2004 Decided: May 20, 2004 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Floyd Junior “Dick” Powell, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Floyd Junior “Dick” Powell petitions..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6624
In Re: FLOYD JUNIOR “DICK” POWELL,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus
(CA-02-138)
Submitted: May 13, 2004 Decided: May 20, 2004
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Floyd Junior “Dick” Powell, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Floyd Junior “Dick” Powell petitions for writ of mandamus
requesting that this Court compel the district court to act on his
pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. Because the district court
has acted in Powell’s § 2255 action as recently as November 2003,
we find no undue delay. Accordingly, although we grant leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
- 2 -
Source: CourtListener
