Filed: Dec. 26, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2172 In re: DENARD EDWARD CARRINGTON, a/k/a Bird, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:09-cr-00160-JRS-1; 3:11-cv-00670-JRS) Submitted: December 20, 2012 Decided: December 26, 2012 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Denard Edward Carrington, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2172 In re: DENARD EDWARD CARRINGTON, a/k/a Bird, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:09-cr-00160-JRS-1; 3:11-cv-00670-JRS) Submitted: December 20, 2012 Decided: December 26, 2012 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Denard Edward Carrington, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit...
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2172 In re: DENARD EDWARD CARRINGTON, a/k/a Bird, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:09-cr-00160-JRS-1; 3:11-cv-00670-JRS) Submitted: December 20, 2012 Decided: December 26, 2012 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Denard Edward Carrington, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Denard Edward Carrington petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion. 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 2
