Court Opinion

ID: 9890432
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-12 21:00:34.38611+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:50:02.344748
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1970      Doc: 6         Filed: 10/11/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1970

        In re: MITCHELL SWAIN,

                            Petitioner.

        On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Eastern
        District of North Carolina, at Greenville. (4:07-cr-00062-D-1)

        Submitted: September 29, 2023                                 Decided: October 11, 2023

        Before WYNN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Mitchell Swain, Petitioner Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1970         Doc: 6        Filed: 10/11/2023       Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Mitchell Swain petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has

        unduly delayed in adjudicating his motion for sentencing relief under § 404(b) of the First

        Step Act. This motion was pending before the district court upon remand from this court.

        See United States v. Swain, 49 F.4th 398, 403-04 (4th Cir. 2022). Swain seeks an order

        from this court directing the district court to act, but our review of the district court’s docket

        reveals that the district court granted Swain’s motion on September 29, 2023. Accordingly,

        because the district court has recently decided Swain’s motion, 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 this court and argument would not aid the

        decisional process.

                                                                                   PETITION DENIED

                                                        2