In re: Smith v.

Fourth Circuit

In re: Smith v.

10 F. App'x 189

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 29, 2001·No. 01-6576·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Rodney Eugene Smith filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to have this court issue an order directing the district court to act on his habeas corpus petition. Because the district, court recently dismissed Smith’s petition for habeas corpus, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 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.

Rodney Eugene Smith filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to have this court issue an order directing the district court to act on his habeas corpus petition. Because the district, court recently dismissed Smith’s petition for habeas corpus, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 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: Smith v., 10 F. App'x 189 (4th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

10 F. App'x 189 (In re: Smith v.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.