In re Beverly
This text of 479 F. App'x 467 (In re Beverly) 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
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Kenneth D. Beverly petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his various motions attacking his convictions. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court recently denied or dismissed the motions. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Beverly’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. To the extent Beverly seeks to directly challenge his conviction, such relief is not available by way of a mandamus petition. We grant leave to proceed in forma pau-peris. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials be[468]*468fore 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
479 F. App'x 467, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-beverly-ca4-2012.