In re: Kelvin Spott

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for other relief [999255086-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999219318-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999209033-2] Originating case number: 3:98-cr-00047-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999288171]. Mailed to: K. Spotts. [13-2226]

Download PDF
Appeal: 13-2226 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/31/2014 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-2226 In Re: KELVIN ANDRE SPOTTS, a/k/a Shorty, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:98-cr-00047-1) Submitted: January 27, 2014 Decided: January 31, 2014 Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kelvin Andre Spotts, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 13-2226 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/31/2014 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Kelvin Andre Spotts petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order from this court directing the district court to act on his motions for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying his motion to reopen his initial 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) proceedings in light of United States v. Fisher, 711 F.3d 460 (4th Cir. 2013). reveals that the reconsideration. Our review of the district court’s docket district court has denied the motions for Accordingly, because the district court has recently acted on Spotts’ motions, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Spotts’ motion to remove stay of mandate and amendment to petition for rehearing and/or rehearing en banc is denied. We dispense with oral contentions argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before this court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?