Filed: Apr. 23, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1320 In re: GEORGE JEFFERSON, III, a/k/a Ace, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (No. 5:09-cr-00251-FL-1) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Jefferson, III, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: George Jefferson, III, petitions for
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1320 In re: GEORGE JEFFERSON, III, a/k/a Ace, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (No. 5:09-cr-00251-FL-1) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Jefferson, III, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: George Jefferson, III, petitions for a..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1320 In re: GEORGE JEFFERSON, III, a/k/a Ace, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (No. 5:09-cr-00251-FL-1) Submitted: April 18, 2013 Decided: April 23, 2013 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. George Jefferson, III, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: George Jefferson, III, 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 deny the mandamus petition. We grant permission 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
