In Re: Johnny Gore v., 13-1919 (2013)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 13-1919
Visitors: 50
Filed: Sep. 03, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1919 In re: JOHNNY LEE GORE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:01-cr-00627-CWH-9) Submitted: August 29, 2013 Decided: September 3, 2013 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johnny Lee Gore, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Johnny Lee Gore petitions for a writ of mandamus, claiming that
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1919 In re: JOHNNY LEE GORE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:01-cr-00627-CWH-9) Submitted: August 29, 2013 Decided: September 3, 2013 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johnny Lee Gore, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Johnny Lee Gore petitions for a writ of mandamus, claiming that ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1919 In re: JOHNNY LEE GORE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:01-cr-00627-CWH-9) Submitted: August 29, 2013 Decided: September 3, 2013 Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Johnny Lee Gore, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Johnny Lee Gore petitions for a writ of mandamus, claiming that the district court has unduly delayed issuing a ruling on his 28 U.S.C.A. ยง 2255 (West Supp. 2013) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We find that the present record does not reveal undue delay by the district court. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny the mandamus petition. 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
Source: CourtListener
