Narrative Opinion Summary
Dwayne Deleston's petition for a writ of mandamus has been denied by a per curiam opinion, which emphasizes that unpublished opinions hold no binding precedent in this circuit. Deleston claims the district court has excessively delayed in addressing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion and two related Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motions. However, the court finds no evidence of undue delay. Consequently, Deleston is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, but both the motion to compel and the mandamus petition are denied. The court concludes that oral argument is unnecessary as the submitted materials sufficiently convey the relevant facts and legal arguments.
Legal Issues Addressed
Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperissubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Despite denying the mandamus petition, the court permits Deleston to proceed without prepayment of fees, acknowledging his financial status.
Reasoning: Consequently, Deleston is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, but both the motion to compel and the mandamus petition are denied.
Necessity of Oral Argumentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary as the briefs and materials presented adequately addressed the issues.
Reasoning: The court concludes that oral argument is unnecessary as the submitted materials sufficiently convey the relevant facts and legal arguments.
Review of District Court's Delay in § 2255 Motionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court assessed Deleston's claim of excessive delay by the district court in handling his § 2255 motion and two related Rule 60(b) motions, finding no undue delay.
Reasoning: Deleston claims the district court has excessively delayed in addressing his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion and two related Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motions. However, the court finds no evidence of undue delay.
Unpublished Opinions as Non-Binding Precedentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reiterates that unpublished opinions do not serve as binding precedent within the circuit, impacting Deleston's reliance on such opinions in his argument.
Reasoning: Dwayne Deleston's petition for a writ of mandanus has been denied by a per curiam opinion, which emphasizes that unpublished opinions hold no binding precedent in this circuit.