In re Rushie
This text of 486 F. App'x 385 (In re Rushie) 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Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Robert Everton Rushie petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on [386]*386his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction of sentence. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We find the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
486 F. App'x 385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rushie-ca4-2012.