Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 7 views

    In Re: Miller V., 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Johnny Bernard Miller's petition for a writ of mandamus. Miller had petitioned the court to direct the district court to act on his motion filed under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. However, the district court had already denied Miller's Rule 60(b) motion on January 7, 2004 and entered the order on the docket on January 30, 2004. Therefore, the appeals court found Miller's petition for a writ of mandamus to be moot.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    In Re: Miller V., 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Johnny Bernard Miller's petition for a writ of mandamus. Miller had petitioned the court to direct the district court to act on his motion filed under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. However, the district court had already denied Miller's Rule 60(b) motion on January 7, 2004 and entered the order on the docket on January 30, 2004. Therefore, the appeals court found Miller's petition for a writ of mandamus to be moot.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-05-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7890

    Original Title

    In re: Miller v., 4th Cir. (2004)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Johnny Bernard Miller's petition for a writ of mandamus. Miller had petitioned the court to direct the district court to act on his motion filed under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. However, the district court had already denied Miller's Rule 60(b) motion on January 7, 2004 and entered the order on the docket on January 30, 2004. Therefore, the appeals court found Miller's petition for a writ of mandamus to be moot.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    7 views2 pages

    In Re: Miller V., 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Johnny Bernard Miller's petition for a writ of mandamus. Miller had petitioned the court to direct the district court to act on his motion filed under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. However, the district court had already denied Miller's Rule 60(b) motion on January 7, 2004 and entered the order on the docket on January 30, 2004. Therefore, the appeals court found Miller's petition for a writ of mandamus to be moot.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-7890

    In Re:

    JOHNNY BERNARD MILLER,


    Petitioner.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-92-101-MU)

    Submitted:

    April 7, 2004

    Decided:

    May 10, 2004

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Johnny Bernard Miller, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Johnny Bernard Miller petitions this court for a writ of
    mandamus directing the district court to act upon his motion filed
    pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b).

    The district court filed its

    order denying Millers Rule 60(b) motion on January 7, 2004, and


    entered the order on the docket on January 30, 2004.

    Accordingly,

    although we grant Millers motion for leave to proceed in forma


    pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition as moot.

    We also grant the

    Governments motions for leave to file a supplemental appendix and


    to seal Exhibit 3 contained therein.

    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