Filed: Aug. 22, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1713 In re: TONY CURTIS BARRINO, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Procedendo. (3:11-cv-00247-GCM-DCK) Submitted: August 18, 2011 Decided: August 22, 2011 Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Curtis Barrino, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony Barrino petitions for a writ of procedendo,
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1713 In re: TONY CURTIS BARRINO, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Procedendo. (3:11-cv-00247-GCM-DCK) Submitted: August 18, 2011 Decided: August 22, 2011 Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Curtis Barrino, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony Barrino petitions for a writ of procedendo, c..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1713 In re: TONY CURTIS BARRINO, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Procedendo. (3:11-cv-00247-GCM-DCK) Submitted: August 18, 2011 Decided: August 22, 2011 Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Curtis Barrino, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony Barrino petitions for a writ of procedendo, claiming error in the district court’s disposition of his complaint against the United States Government. By his petition, he seeks an order from this court directing the district court to proceed to judgment. The district court, however, has already entered a judgment in his case. The writ of procedendo is therefore unavailable. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for a writ of procedendo. 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
