In Re: Tucker v.

Fourth Circuit

In Re: Tucker v.

279 F. App'x 289

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 28, 2008·No. 08-1264·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Reginald S. Tucker petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his habeas corpus petition. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court dismissed the petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court remedies. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Tucker’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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:

Reginald S. Tucker petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his habeas corpus petition. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court dismissed the petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court remedies. Accordingly, because the district court has recently decided Tucker’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. 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: Tucker v., 279 F. App'x 289 (4th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

279 F. App'x 289 (In Re: Tucker v.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.