In re: Bramwell v., 96-618 (1997)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 96-618
Visitors: 40
Filed: Oct. 17, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-618 In Re: MARLON BRAMWELL, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-91-429-A) Submitted: April 17, 1997 Decided: October 17, 1997 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marlon Bramwell, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Marlon P. Bramwell h
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-618 In Re: MARLON BRAMWELL, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-91-429-A) Submitted: April 17, 1997 Decided: October 17, 1997 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marlon Bramwell, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Marlon P. Bramwell ha..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-618 In Re: MARLON BRAMWELL, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-91-429-A) Submitted: April 17, 1997 Decided: October 17, 1997 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marlon Bramwell, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Marlon P. Bramwell has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel a district court reporter to supply him with missing pages of a transcript for which he has already paid. Be- cause Bramwell now has the material he seeks, we deny his petition as moot. 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 2
Source: CourtListener
