Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: Bailey V., 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    1) James Claude Bailey filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging that the district court unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and motion for immediate release. 2) The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found that there had been no undue delay by the district court. 3) The Court denied Bailey's petition for a writ of mandamus, motion for appointment of counsel, and motion for expedited response. The Court also granted Bailey's motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-07-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6347

    Original Title

    In re: Bailey v., 4th Cir. (2005)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) James Claude Bailey filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging that the district court unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and motion for immediate release. 2) The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found that there had been no undue delay by the district court. 3) The Court denied Bailey's petition for a writ of mandamus, motion for appointment of counsel, and motion for expedited response. The Court also granted Bailey's motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    10 views2 pages

    In Re: Bailey V., 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) James Claude Bailey filed a petition for a writ of mandamus alleging that the district court unduly delayed acting on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and motion for immediate release. 2) The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found that there had been no undue delay by the district court. 3) The Court denied Bailey's petition for a writ of mandamus, motion for appointment of counsel, and motion for expedited response. The Court also granted Bailey's motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 05-6347

    In Re:

    JAMES CLAUDE BAILEY,


    Petitioner.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-03-187)

    Submitted:

    June 15, 2005

    Decided:

    July 28, 2005

    Before KING and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    James Claude Bailey, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    James Claude Bailey petitions for writ of mandamus,
    alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his 28
    U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion and his motion for immediate release.
    He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to
    act.

    We find there has been no undue delay in the district court.

    Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis,


    we deny Baileys mandamus petition and his motion for appointment
    of counsel.
    response.

    We further deny as moot his motion for expedited


    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 -

    You might also like