Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

In Re: Mario Alonso Marquez-Ramos, 95-8004 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 95-8004 Visitors: 73
Filed: Apr. 18, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 52 F.3d 321 NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit. In re: Mario Alonso MARQUEZ-RAMOS, Petitioner. No. 95-8004. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: March 15, 1995 Decided: April 18, 1995 Marie Alonso Marquez-Ramos, Petitioner Pro Se. Before RUSSELL and WILLIAM
More

52 F.3d 321
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

In re: Mario Alonso MARQUEZ-RAMOS, Petitioner.

No. 95-8004.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 15, 1995
Decided: April 18, 1995

Marie Alonso Marquez-Ramos, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before RUSSELL and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

1

Mario Alonso Marquez-Ramos petitions this Court for a writ of mandamus compelling the magistrate judge assigned to review his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 (1988) to recuse himself, and requiring action on his motion without further delay. Because Ramos's allegations that the magistrate judge is biased against him cite to no extrajudicial source for the bias, we find that recusal is unwarranted. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 827 (4th Cir.1987). Moreover, we disagree with Ramos's contention that the delay in this case is, at this point, unreasonable. We therefore grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, but deny the petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer