In re: Calvin Winbush


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999931461-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999939003-2]. Originating case number: 3:12-cr-00021-HEH-1,3:14-cv-00724-HEH-RCY. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000024774]. Mailed to: Calvin Winbush. [16-7253]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-7253 Doc: 5 Filed: 02/16/2017 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-7253 In Re: CALVIN WINBUSH, a/k/a Good Game, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:12-cr-00021-HEH-1; 3:14-cv-00724-HEH-RCY) Submitted: February 7, 2017 Decided: February 16, 2017 Before KEENAN, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Calvin Winbush, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-7253 Doc: 5 Filed: 02/16/2017 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Calvin Winbush petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. He seeks an directing the district court to act. court’s docket reveals that the order from this court Our review of the district district court ruled on the § 2255 motion, denying it and declining to grant a certificate of appealability. See United States v. Winbush, No. 3:12-cr- 00021-HEH-RCY-1 (E.D. Va. Sept. 21, 2016). that order is pending in this court. Winbush, No. Accordingly, 16-7527 because (4th the Cir.) district Winbush’s appeal of See United States v. (docketed court has Nov. recently Winbush’s case, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We 2, dispense 2016). decided We grant with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 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?