In re: Smith v.

Fourth Circuit

In re: Smith v.

55 F. App'x 713

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re: Smith v.. Read the opinion of the Court — 122 F. App'x 687 →

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided February 13, 2003·No. 03-6126·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Rodney Eugene Smith petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his “Verified Emergency Petition to Arrest Judgment for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.” He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Because the district court has recently denied Smith’s petition, we deny his petition for mandamus relief as moot. We grant Smith leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this Court. 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 petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his “Verified Emergency Petition to Arrest Judgment for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.” He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Because the district court has recently denied Smith’s petition, we deny his petition for mandamus relief as moot. We grant Smith leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this Court. 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., 55 F. App'x 713 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

55 F. App'x 713 (In re: Smith v.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.