HLD-009 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 19-2833
___________
In re: DANIEL PATRICK SHEEHAN,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(Related to M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 1-18-cv-01748)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
September 12, 2019
Before: SMITH, Chief Judge, AMBRO and ROTH, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: October 30, 2019)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
Daniel Patrick Sheehan was convicted of extortion and using a “destructive
device” to commit extortion, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951 and 924(c)(1)(B)(ii).
After unsuccessful challenges to his convictions on direct appeal and in proceedings
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Sheehan filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the
District Court. Now, seeking an order from this Court compelling the District Court to
*
This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.
adjudicate his § 2241 petition, Sheehan has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. The
subject § 2241 petition, however, has since been dismissed by the District Court. See
ECF 25-26. Sheehan’s mandamus petition is thus moot and will be dismissed. See
Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 699-700 (3d Cr. 1996).
2