Filed: Jan. 10, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2187 In Re: JAMES STEVEN LESANE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:08-cr-00185-REP-1) Submitted: January 4, 2013 Decided: January 10, 2013 Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Steven Lesane, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James Steven Lesane petitions
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2187 In Re: JAMES STEVEN LESANE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:08-cr-00185-REP-1) Submitted: January 4, 2013 Decided: January 10, 2013 Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Steven Lesane, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James Steven Lesane petitions f..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-2187
In Re: JAMES STEVEN LESANE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(3:08-cr-00185-REP-1)
Submitted: January 4, 2013 Decided: January 10, 2013
Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Steven Lesane, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Steven Lesane petitions for a writ of mandamus,
alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28
U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) and Fed. R. Crim. P. Rule
33(a) motions. He seeks an order from this court directing the
district court to act. Our review of the district court’s
docket reveals that the district court has entered final orders
deciding both Lesane’s § 2255 and Rule 33(a) motions.
Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided
Lesane’s case, we deny the mandamus petition and motion to
supplement the mandamus petition as moot. To the extent Lesane
seeks to directly challenge his underlying conviction, such
relief is not available by way of mandamus. United States v.
Moussaoui,
333 F.3d 509, 517 (4th Cir. 2003) (noting mandamus is
not substitute for appeal). To obtain appellate review, Lesane
must note appeals of the district court’s orders. Although we
grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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