Filed: May 03, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1202 In Re: JEFFREY M. YOUNG-BEY, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:08-cv-02722-JFM) Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 3, 2011 Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey M. Young-Bey, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jeffrey M. Young-Bey petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1202 In Re: JEFFREY M. YOUNG-BEY, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:08-cv-02722-JFM) Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 3, 2011 Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jeffrey M. Young-Bey, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jeffrey M. Young-Bey petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1202
In Re: JEFFREY M. YOUNG-BEY,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(1:08-cv-02722-JFM)
Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 3, 2011
Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey M. Young-Bey, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey M. Young-Bey petitions for a writ of mandamus,
alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28
U.S.C. § 2241 (2006) petition. He seeks an order from this
court directing the district court to act. Our review of the
district court’s docket reveals that the district court denied
Young-Bey’s petition on March 14, 2011. Accordingly, because
the district court has recently decided Young-Bey’s case, we
deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed
in forma pauperis. 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