Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: Duncan V., 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    Daniel Arthur Duncan filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging that the district court unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the docket sheet and found that the district court had dismissed claims one, two and four of Duncan's § 2255 motion on March 16, 2006, but referred claim three to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. The Court of Appeals determined that the case was proceeding appropriately without undue delay and denied Duncan's petition for a writ of mandamus.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-05-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-6400

    Original Title

    In Re: Duncan v., 4th Cir. (2006)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Daniel Arthur Duncan filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging that the district court unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the docket sheet and found that the district court had dismissed claims one, two and four of Duncan's § 2255 motion on March 16, 2006, but referred claim three to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. The Court of Appeals determined that the case was proceeding appropriately without undue delay and denied Duncan's petition for a writ of mandamus.

    Copyright:

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

    In Re: Duncan V., 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Daniel Arthur Duncan filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging that the district court unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed the docket sheet and found that the district court had dismissed claims one, two and four of Duncan's § 2255 motion on March 16, 2006, but referred claim three to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. The Court of Appeals determined that the case was proceeding appropriately without undue delay and denied Duncan's petition for a writ of mandamus.

    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. 06-6400

    In Re:

    DANIEL ARTHUR DUNCAN,

    Petitioner.

    On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus


    (3:04-cr-00304-HEH; 3:05-cv-00369-HEH)

    Submitted: May 16, 2006

    Decided: May 24, 2006

    Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Daniel Arthur Duncan, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Daniel Arthur Duncan petitions for a writ of mandamus,
    alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28
    U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion.

    He seeks an order from this court

    directing the district court to act.

    Our review of the docket

    sheet reveals that on March 16, 2006, the district court dismissed
    claims one, two and four of Duncans 2255 motion, but referred
    claim three to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

    We

    find that the case is proceeding apace, and there has been no undue
    delay.

    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 the court and argument would not
    aid the decisional process.

    PETITION DENIED

    - 2 -

    You might also like