Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: McClelland, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    Anthony McClelland filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging undue delay by the district court in acting on his motion under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the district court docket and found that the district court had recently denied McClelland's 3582 motion. Therefore, the appeals court denied the mandamus petition as moot since the district court had now acted on the motion. The appeals court also granted McClelland's request to proceed in forma pauperis but dispensed with oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-06-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-1298

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Anthony McClelland filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging undue delay by the district court in acting on his motion under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the district court docket and found that the district court had recently denied McClelland's 3582 motion. Therefore, the appeals court denied the mandamus petition as moot since the district court had now acted on the motion. The appeals court also granted McClelland's request to proceed in forma pauperis but dispensed with oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    In Re: McClelland, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Anthony McClelland filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging undue delay by the district court in acting on his motion under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The appeals court reviewed the district court docket and found that the district court had recently denied McClelland's 3582 motion. Therefore, the appeals court denied the mandamus petition as moot since the district court had now acted on the motion. The appeals court also granted McClelland's request to proceed in forma pauperis but dispensed with oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 10-1298

    In Re:

    ANTHONY D. MCCLELLAND, a/k/a Ant,


    Petitioner.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

    Submitted:

    (5:05-cr-00009-RLV-DCK-13)

    June 1, 2010

    Decided:

    June 10, 2010

    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Anthony D. McClelland, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Anthony

    D.

    McClelland

    petitions

    for

    writ

    of

    mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting


    on his motion filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) (2006).
    He seeks an order from this court directing the district court
    to act.
    the

    Our review of the district courts docket reveals that

    district

    Accordingly,

    court

    has

    denied

    because

    the

    district

    McClellands
    court

    has

    3582

    motion.

    recently

    decided

    McClellands case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot.


    grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

    We

    We dispense with oral

    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately


    presented in the materials before the court and argument would
    not aid the decisional process.
    PETITION DENIED

    You might also like