Daniel Sheehan v.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
• Decided: October 30, 2019
• Docket: 19-2833
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

HLD-009 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________

No. 19-2833 ___________

In re: DANIEL PATRICK SHEEHAN, Petitioner ____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Related to M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 1-18-cv-01748) ____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. September 12, 2019 Before: SMITH, Chief Judge, AMBRO and ROTH, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: October 30, 2019) _________

OPINION* _________

PER CURIAM

Daniel Patrick Sheehan was convicted of extortion and using a “destructive

device” to commit extortion, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951 and 924(c)(1)(B)(ii).

After unsuccessful challenges to his convictions on direct appeal and in proceedings

under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Sheehan filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the

District Court. Now, seeking an order from this Court compelling the District Court to

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. adjudicate his § 2241 petition, Sheehan has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. The

subject § 2241 petition, however, has since been dismissed by the District Court. See

ECF 25-26. Sheehan’s mandamus petition is thus moot and will be dismissed. See

Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 699-700 (3d Cr. 1996).