Filed: Aug. 28, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1151 In Re: JOHN ANDREW SPEAGLE, SR., Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:05-cr-00234-RLV-CH-2; 5:12-cv-00134-RLV) Submitted: August 25, 2015 Decided: August 28, 2015 Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Andrew Speagle, Sr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1151 In Re: JOHN ANDREW SPEAGLE, SR., Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:05-cr-00234-RLV-CH-2; 5:12-cv-00134-RLV) Submitted: August 25, 2015 Decided: August 28, 2015 Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Andrew Speagle, Sr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-1151
In Re: JOHN ANDREW SPEAGLE, SR.,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(5:05-cr-00234-RLV-CH-2; 5:12-cv-00134-RLV)
Submitted: August 25, 2015 Decided: August 28, 2015
Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John Andrew Speagle, Sr., Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Andrew Speagle, Sr., petitions for a writ of mandamus,
alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his
motion to recall the district court’s mandate and reconsider its
order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. 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 disposed of Speagle’s pending motions on August
13, 2015. Accordingly, because the district court has recently
decided Speagle’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 this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2