In re: Clifton Lee

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998853870-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [998847771-2]; terminating Motion for abeyance (Local Rule 12(d)) [998855502-2] Originating case number: 7:08-cr-00041-GEC,7:10-cv-80270-GEC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998916190]. Mailed to: Lee. [12-1595]

Appeal: 12-1595

Doc: 7

Filed: 08/15/2012

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-1595

In Re: CLIFTON DWIGHT LEE, a/k/a Lite,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(7:08-cr-00041-GEC; 7:10-cv-80270-GEC)

Submitted:

July 19, 2012

Decided:

August 15, 2012

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clifton Dwight Lee, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-1595

Doc: 7

Filed: 08/15/2012

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Clifton Dwight Lee petitions for a writ of mandamus,
alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28
U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion.
from

this

court

vacating

the

criminal

He seeks an order

judgment

against

him,

directing the district court to act on his § 2255 motion, or
compelling

the

district

habeas action.

judge

to

recuse

himself

from

Lee’s

We find there has been no undue delay in the

district court and that Lee is otherwise not entitled to the
mandamus relief he seeks.

Accordingly, although we grant Lee’s

application to proceed in forma pauperis and grant Lee’s request
to

withdraw

his

motion

to

place

his

abeyance, we deny the mandamus petition.

mandamus

petition

in

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

2