U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2017

In Re: Steven Prentice v.

In Re: Steven Prentice v.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided February 2, 2017

In Re: Steven Prentice v.

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1851

In re: STEVEN DIXON PRENTICE, Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:16-cv-00179-CCE-JEP)

Submitted: January 31, 2017 Decided: February 2, 2017

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam.

Steven Dixon Prentice, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Steven Dixon Prentice petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his “Demand for Release” in connection with his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. The district court’s docket sheet reveals that the court dismissed without prejudice Prentice’s § 2241 petition on May 27, 2016. Accordingly, we deny Prentice’s mandamus petition. 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.