In re Robinson

Fourth Circuit

In re Robinson

111 F. App'x 190

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 22, 2004

DocketNo. 04-4613

StatusPublished

This text of 111 F. App'x 190 (In re Robinson) 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 Robinson, 111 F. App'x 190 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Gary Robinson petitions for writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his post-judgment of conviction motions. 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, although we grant Robinson leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his petition for writ of mandamus. 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.

Gary Robinson petitions for writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his post-judgment of conviction motions. 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, although we grant Robinson leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his petition for writ of mandamus. 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)

111 F. App'x 190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-robinson-ca4-2004.