Filed: Sep. 09, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6419 In Re: PHILIP B. GREER, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-01-11; CR-01-45) Submitted: August 26, 2005 Decided: September 9, 2005 Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Philip B. Greer, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Philip B. Greer petitions for writ of ma
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6419 In Re: PHILIP B. GREER, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-01-11; CR-01-45) Submitted: August 26, 2005 Decided: September 9, 2005 Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Philip B. Greer, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Philip B. Greer petitions for writ of man..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6419 In Re: PHILIP B. GREER, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-01-11; CR-01-45) Submitted: August 26, 2005 Decided: September 9, 2005 Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Philip B. Greer, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Philip B. Greer petitions for writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. The district court denied Greer’s § 2255 motion by order entered on August 5, 2005. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Greer’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 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 -
