Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re Linwood C. Lee, 877 F.2d 59, 4th Cir. (1989)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    Linwood Lee filed a petition for a writ of mandamus asking the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to direct the district court to rule on post-judgment motions in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 action and provide him a free copy of his trial transcript. The Fourth Circuit denied the petition, finding it moot as the district court had ruled on the post-judgment motions, and that Lee's request for a transcript was more appropriately considered in his pending appeals of the district court's denial of his § 2255 motion and motion for a transcript.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1989-05-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 877 F.2d 59 Docket: 88-8043

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Linwood Lee filed a petition for a writ of mandamus asking the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to direct the district court to rule on post-judgment motions in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 action and provide him a free copy of his trial transcript. The Fourth Circuit denied the petition, finding it moot as the district court had ruled on the post-judgment motions, and that Lee's request for a transcript was more appropriately considered in his pending appeals of the district court's denial of his § 2255 motion and motion for a transcript.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views2 pages

    In Re Linwood C. Lee, 877 F.2d 59, 4th Cir. (1989)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Linwood Lee filed a petition for a writ of mandamus asking the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals to direct the district court to rule on post-judgment motions in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 action and provide him a free copy of his trial transcript. The Fourth Circuit denied the petition, finding it moot as the district court had ruled on the post-judgment motions, and that Lee's request for a transcript was more appropriately considered in his pending appeals of the district court's denial of his § 2255 motion and motion for a transcript.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    877 F.

    2d 59
    Unpublished Disposition

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    In re Linwood C. LEE, Petitioner.
    No. 88-8043.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted April 26, 1989.
    Decided May 25, 1989.

    Linwood C. Lee, petitioner pro se.


    Before WIDENER, K.K. HALL, and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    Linwood C. Lee, a federal prisoner, petitions this court for a writ of mandamus.
    He asks the court to direct the district court to rule on post-judgment motions
    Lee has filed in United States v. Lee, C/A No. Y-88-437 (D.Md.), an action
    brought under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 to vacate his conviction. He also asks this
    court to direct the district court to provide him with a free copy of his trial
    transcript. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis but deny the petition.

    Because the district court has ruled on Lee's post-judgment motions, we find
    that his petition is moot insofar as it challenges delay in the district court. In
    addition, we decline to consider Lee's transcript request. Lee has appealed the
    district court's order denying his motion for a trial transcript as well as the order
    denying the Sec. 2255 motion. United States v. Lee, No. 88-6758; United
    States v. Lee, No. 89-7008. We find that it would be more appropriate to
    consider this request for a transcript in the course of review in those appeals,
    which have been consolidated. Cf. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958,
    960 (4th Cir.1979) (mandamus petition may not be used as substitute for an

    appeal).
    3

    PETITION DENIED.

    You might also like