Filed: Sep. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1767 In re: LARRY D. HILL, JR., Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:13-cr-00028-BR-1; 5:18-hc-02024-BO) Submitted: September 13, 2018 Decided: September 17, 2018 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry D. Hill, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Larry D
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1767 In re: LARRY D. HILL, JR., Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:13-cr-00028-BR-1; 5:18-hc-02024-BO) Submitted: September 13, 2018 Decided: September 17, 2018 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry D. Hill, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Larry D...
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-1767
In re: LARRY D. HILL, JR.,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:13-cr-00028-BR-1; 5:18-hc-02024-BO)
Submitted: September 13, 2018 Decided: September 17, 2018
Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Larry D. Hill, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Larry D. Hill, Jr., petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court
has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. 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
*
We note that pleadings related to Hill’s § 2241 petition have been filed under
two case numbers: No. 5:18-hc-02024-BO and No. 4:13-cr-00028-BR-1.
2