Filed: Nov. 04, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7013 In Re: LARRY DOTSON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-02-6) Submitted: October 20, 2003 Decided: November 4, 2003 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Dotson, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Larry Dotson has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus wi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7013 In Re: LARRY DOTSON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-02-6) Submitted: October 20, 2003 Decided: November 4, 2003 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Dotson, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Larry Dotson has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus wit..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7013 In Re: LARRY DOTSON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-02-6) Submitted: October 20, 2003 Decided: November 4, 2003 Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Dotson, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Larry Dotson has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus with this court seeking to have this court direct the district court to rule on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition and all associated motions. The district court disposed of Dotson’s action and the motions he filed by orders entered July 14, 2003 and September 22, 2003. Accordingly, although we grant Dotson’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his motion to incorporate, and deny as moot his petition for mandamus relief. 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
