In re: Baker
This text of In re: Baker (In re: Baker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1328
In re: PHILLIP LAVETTE BAKER, a/k/a Shorty,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:02-cr-00375-WLO-2)
Submitted: May 26, 2011 Decided: May 31, 2011
Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Phillip Lavette Baker, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Phillip Lavette Baker petitions for a writ of
mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting
on his motion for reduction in sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 3582(c)(2) (2006). He seeks an order from this court
directing the district court to act. Although we find that
mandamus relief is not warranted because the delay is not
unreasonable, we deny the mandamus petition without prejudice.
We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In re: Baker, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-baker-ca4-2011.