Filed: Mar. 17, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1079 In re: ANGELO GALLOWAY, a/k/a Gelo, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (No. 2:10-cr-00096-MSD-TEM-2) Submitted: March 12, 2015 Decided: March 17, 2015 Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Angelo Galloway, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Angelo Galloway petitions for a writ of mandam
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1079 In re: ANGELO GALLOWAY, a/k/a Gelo, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (No. 2:10-cr-00096-MSD-TEM-2) Submitted: March 12, 2015 Decided: March 17, 2015 Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Angelo Galloway, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Angelo Galloway petitions for a writ of mandamu..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1079 In re: ANGELO GALLOWAY, a/k/a Gelo, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (No. 2:10-cr-00096-MSD-TEM-2) Submitted: March 12, 2015 Decided: March 17, 2015 Before GREGORY, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Angelo Galloway, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Angelo Galloway petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed acting on his “Motion to Rule Under Rule 60(b),” which requests relief from his criminal judgment. 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 the motion by order entered January 27, 2015. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Galloway’s motion, 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2
