Opinions of the United
2005 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
5-4-2005
In Re: Carter
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 05-1471
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005
Recommended Citation
"In Re: Carter " (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 1246.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/1246
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
HPS-58 (March 2005) NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
NO. 05-1471
________________
IN RE: DELROY D. CARTER,
Petitioner.
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
(Related to Civ. No. 02-cv-02016)
_____________________________________
Submitted Under Rule 21, Fed. R. App. Pro.
March 11, 2005
BEFORE: SCIRICA, CHIEF JUDGE, WEIS and GARTH, CIRCUIT JUDGES
Filed: May 4, 2005
_______________________
OPINION
_______________________
PER CURIAM.
Delroy D. Carter asks that we issue a writ of mandamus directing the
District Court to rule on his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 claiming ineffective
assistance of counsel and that the District Court erred in computing his sentence. For the
reasons that follow, we will deny the petition.
Carter is a federal prisoner at FCI-Fort Dix serving seventy-eight months
for illegally reentering the country after deportation. On April 29, 2002, following a
1
direct appeal, he filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. After nearly three years in the
District Court, Carter had not received a ruling on his motion despite multiple requests.
On February 14, 2005, Carter filed the current petition for a writ of mandamus asking us
to direct the District Court to rule on his pending motion.
By order entered April 22, 2005, the District Court denied Carter’s § 2255
motion. Because the District Court has ruled on Carter’s motion, we will deny the
mandamus petition as moot.
2