Filed: Apr. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1220 In re: TONY ERVIN LOPEZ, a/k/a Pullulo, a/k/a Peludo, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:07-cr-00137-TSE-1) Submitted: April 17, 2018 Decided: April 20, 2018 Before WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Ervin Lopez, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1220 In re: TONY ERVIN LOPEZ, a/k/a Pullulo, a/k/a Peludo, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:07-cr-00137-TSE-1) Submitted: April 17, 2018 Decided: April 20, 2018 Before WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Ervin Lopez, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony ..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1220 In re: TONY ERVIN LOPEZ, a/k/a Pullulo, a/k/a Peludo, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:07-cr-00137-TSE-1) Submitted: April 17, 2018 Decided: April 20, 2018 Before WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tony Ervin Lopez, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony Ervin Lopez petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his motion for judicial review. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We conclude that the present record does not reveal undue delay in 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
