In Re: Vicente Mbenga v., 14-1528 (2014)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 14-1528
Visitors: 36
Filed: Sep. 02, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1528 In re: VICENTE BILORA MBENGA, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:09-cr-00548-RDB-6) Submitted: August 28, 2014 Decided: September 2, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vicente Bilora Mbenga, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Vicente Bilora Mbenga petitions for a writ of ma
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1528 In re: VICENTE BILORA MBENGA, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:09-cr-00548-RDB-6) Submitted: August 28, 2014 Decided: September 2, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vicente Bilora Mbenga, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Vicente Bilora Mbenga petitions for a writ of man..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1528
In re: VICENTE BILORA MBENGA,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:09-cr-00548-RDB-6)
Submitted: August 28, 2014 Decided: September 2, 2014
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vicente Bilora Mbenga, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Vicente Bilora Mbenga petitions for a writ of
mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in
ruling on his motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 (2012).
He seeks an order from this court directing the district court
to act. We find the present record does not reveal undue delay
in the district court. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed
in forma pauperis and deny the mandamus petition. 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.
PETITION DENIED
2
Source: CourtListener
