In re Miller

Fourth Circuit

In re Miller

63 F. App'x 717

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 21, 2003·No. No. 02-7743·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM:

George Miller petitions for a writ of mandamus alleging that the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. After Miller filed the instant mandamus petition, the district court entered an order denying relief on Miller’s habeas petition. Accordingly, we deny Miller’s mandamus petition as moot but grant his motion 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

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM:

George Miller petitions for a writ of mandamus alleging that the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. After Miller filed the instant mandamus petition, the district court entered an order denying relief on Miller’s habeas petition. Accordingly, we deny Miller’s mandamus petition as moot but grant his motion 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.

In re Miller, 63 F. App'x 717 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

63 F. App'x 717 (In re Miller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related