In Re: Lawrence Reese, 19-2451 (2020)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: 19-2451
Visitors: 5
Filed: Mar. 16, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 16, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-2451 In re: LAWRENCE WAYNE REESE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:15-cr-00032-LO-1) Submitted: March 12, 2020 Decided: March 16, 2020 Before KING, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence Wayne Reese, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lawrence Wayne Reese petitions for a writ of mandamus, alle
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-2451 In re: LAWRENCE WAYNE REESE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:15-cr-00032-LO-1) Submitted: March 12, 2020 Decided: March 16, 2020 Before KING, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence Wayne Reese, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lawrence Wayne Reese petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleg..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-2451 In re: LAWRENCE WAYNE REESE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:15-cr-00032-LO-1) Submitted: March 12, 2020 Decided: March 16, 2020 Before KING, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lawrence Wayne Reese, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lawrence Wayne Reese petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his motion to modify sentence. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. The present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, 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
