Filed: Feb. 28, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2290 In re: RODERICK LAUADES BROWN, a/k/a Nick, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:14-cr-00147-RJC-DCK-1; 3:17-cv-00093-RJC) Submitted: February 26, 2019 Decided: February 28, 2019 Before KING, THACKER, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roderick Lauades Brown, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Roderi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2290 In re: RODERICK LAUADES BROWN, a/k/a Nick, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:14-cr-00147-RJC-DCK-1; 3:17-cv-00093-RJC) Submitted: February 26, 2019 Decided: February 28, 2019 Before KING, THACKER, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roderick Lauades Brown, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Roderic..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-2290
In re: RODERICK LAUADES BROWN, a/k/a Nick,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(3:14-cr-00147-RJC-DCK-1; 3:17-cv-00093-RJC)
Submitted: February 26, 2019 Decided: February 28, 2019
Before KING, THACKER, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Roderick Lauades Brown, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Roderick Lauades Brown petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district
court has unduly delayed acting on 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 denied Brown’s § 2255 motion in an order entered on
November 29, 2018. Accordingly, because the district court has decided Brown’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