In Re: Kareem Currence, 19-1399 (2019)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 19-1399
Visitors: 48
Filed: Jun. 17, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1399 In re: KAREEM JAMAL CURRENCE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:05-cr-00231-MLH-1) Submitted: June 13, 2019 Decided: June 17, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kareem Jamal Currence, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kareem Jamal Currence has file
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1399 In re: KAREEM JAMAL CURRENCE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:05-cr-00231-MLH-1) Submitted: June 13, 2019 Decided: June 17, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kareem Jamal Currence, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kareem Jamal Currence has filed..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-1399 In re: KAREEM JAMAL CURRENCE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:05-cr-00231-MLH-1) Submitted: June 13, 2019 Decided: June 17, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kareem Jamal Currence, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kareem Jamal Currence has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on several motions Currence filed in his criminal matter, and he seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act on the motions. The present record reveals no undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we 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
