In re Perkins

Fourth Circuit

In re Perkins

279 F. App'x 288

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 28, 2008

DocketNo. 08-1364

StatusPublished

This text of 279 F. App'x 288 (In re Perkins) 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.

Bluebook

In re Perkins, 279 F. App'x 288 (4th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Artis T. Perkins petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging 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. We find there has been no undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Artis T. Perkins petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging 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. We find there has been no undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 F. App'x 288, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-perkins-ca4-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack