IN RE: Raymond Edward CHESTNUT (2019)

Raymond Edward Chestnut filed a petition for writ of mandamus, a motion to file an amended petition for writ of mandamus, and the amended petition for writ of mandamus.^* In the amended petition, Chestnut alleges the district court has unduly delayed acting on his motion for reduction of sentence under the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-391, § 404, 132 Stat. 5194. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court has granted in part and denied in part the motion for reduction of sentence. Accordingly, because the district court has recently ruled on Chestnut’s motion, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny Chestnut’s motion to expedite. 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

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   We grant Chestnut’s motion to file an amended petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM:

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.