Case ID: f-appx_50/html/0658-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re William T. ROBINSON, Petitioner.
    No. 02-7328.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 7, 2002.
    Decided Nov. 20, 2002.
    William T. Robinson, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Before WILLIAM D. WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

William T. Robinson petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging undue delay in the adjudication of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act, and vacation of his conviction and sentence. Our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court recently dismissed Robinson’s § 2254 petition. Moreover, to the extent Robinson takes issue with the denial of relief in his § 2254 petition, the district court’s order may be challenged on appeal, so mandamus relief is not available. See In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979). Accordingly, although we grant Robinson’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 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.