In re Prentice
This text of 675 F. App'x 318 (In re Prentice) 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Steven Dixon Prentice petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his “Demand for Release” in connection with his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. The district court’s docket sheet reveals that the court dismissed without prejudice Prentice’s § 2241 petition on May 27, 2016. Accordingly, we deny Prentice’s mandamus petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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
675 F. App'x 318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-prentice-ca4-2017.