Filed: Mar. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2287 In re: RHINELANDER HERNANDEZ, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:15-cr-00033-1; 5:17-cv-03000) Submitted: February 26, 2019 Decided: March 5, 2019 Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rhinelander Hernandez, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rhinelande
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-2287 In re: RHINELANDER HERNANDEZ, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:15-cr-00033-1; 5:17-cv-03000) Submitted: February 26, 2019 Decided: March 5, 2019 Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rhinelander Hernandez, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rhinelander..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 18-2287
In re: RHINELANDER HERNANDEZ,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:15-cr-00033-1; 5:17-cv-03000)
Submitted: February 26, 2019 Decided: March 5, 2019
Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rhinelander Hernandez, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Rhinelander Hernandez petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district
court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. He seeks an
order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s
docket reveals that, by opinion and order entered on February 6, 2019, and judgment
entered on February 7, 2019, the district court denied relief on Hernandez’s § 2255
motion. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Hernandez’s case,
we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 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