Case Name: IN RE: Joel DIAZ-HINIRIO, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-02-13
Citations: 677 F. App'x 87
Docket Number: No. 16-4258
Parties: IN RE: Joel DIAZ-HINIRIO, Petitioner
Judges: Before: MCKEE, JORDAN and RESTREPO, Circuit Judges
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 677
Pages: 87–87

Head Matter:
IN RE: Joel DIAZ-HINIRIO, Petitioner
No. 16-4258
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. January 5, 2017
(Opinion filed: February 13, 2017)
Joel Diaz-Hinirio, Pro Se
Kim Linquist, Esq., Delia L. Smith, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, St. Thomas, VI, for Respondent
Before: MCKEE, JORDAN and RESTREPO, Circuit Judges

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM
Joel Diaz-Hinirio pleaded guilty to federal drug and firearms offenses, but he preserved his ability to appeal the District Court's order denying in part his motions to suppress. Diaz-Hinirio appealed' that ruling at C.A. No. 13-3198. In that appeal, we remanded for the District Court to "state its essential findings on the record" as required by Rule 12(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Diaz-Hinirio has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus directing the District Court to comply with our mandate. On December 10, 2016, however, the District Court issued a detailed 59-page opinion explaining its reasons for denying in part Diaz-Hinirio's motions to suppress. (ECF No. ,237.) Thus, Diaz-Hinirio's petition is moot, and we will dismiss it on that basis.
This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.