Filed: Nov. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1786 In re: RODNEY A. KOON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:18-cv-00084-FDW) Submitted: November 15, 2018 Decided: November 19, 2018 Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney A. Koon, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rodney A. Koon petitions for a writ of
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1786 In re: RODNEY A. KOON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:18-cv-00084-FDW) Submitted: November 15, 2018 Decided: November 19, 2018 Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney A. Koon, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rodney A. Koon petitions for a writ of ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-1786
In re: RODNEY A. KOON,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:18-cv-00084-FDW)
Submitted: November 15, 2018 Decided: November 19, 2018
Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rodney A. Koon, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Rodney A. Koon petitions for a writ of mandamus, requesting that we direct the
district court to construe his complaint as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The record
reflects that the district court has in fact construed Koon’s complaint in such a manner
and ruled on the amended § 2254 petition; Koon’s mandamus petition is therefore moot.
To the extent that Koon challenges the district court’s disposition of his § 2254 petition, a
mandamus petition is not a proper substitute for a direct appeal, In re Lockheed Martin
Corp.,
503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007), and, in any event, Koon has filed a direct
appeal of the district court’s decision. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed
in forma pauperis, we deny Koon’s petition for a writ of mandamus. 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