Court Opinion

ID: 9381469
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-22 21:01:18.752634+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:32.799436
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6941      Doc: 16         Filed: 03/21/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-6941

        SARAH ELIZABETH FLANDERS,

                            Petitioner - Appellant,

                     v.

        COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,

                            Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, Senior District Judge. (1:22-cv-00439-AJT-JFA)

        Submitted: March 16, 2023                                         Decided: March 21, 2023

        Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Sarah Elizabeth Flanders, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6941      Doc: 16          Filed: 03/21/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Sarah Elizabeth Flanders, a Virginia prisoner, appeals the district court’s order

        dismissing without prejudice her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for failure to comply with the

        court’s prior order directing Flanders to either pay the $5 filing fee or apply to proceed in

        forma pauperis. Shortly after entry of the district court’s dismissal order, Flanders paid the

        filing fee. The district court subsequently reinstated Flanders’ § 2254 petition and directed

        the Commonwealth to respond. See Flanders v. Virginia, No. 1:22-cv-00439-AJT-JFA

        (E.D. Va., PACER No. 13). By virtue of this order, the district court effectively granted

        Flanders the only relief she could have obtained by way of this appeal. Accordingly, we

        dismiss this appeal as moot. See CVLR Performance Horses, Inc. v. Wynne, 792 F.3d 469,

        474 (4th Cir. 2015) (“Litigation may become moot during the pendency of an appeal when

        an intervening event makes it impossible for the court to grant effective relief to the

        prevailing party.”).   We dispense 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.

                                                                                        DISMISSED

                                                      2