Third Circuit disposition — 222773np-pdf

HLD-001 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 22-2773
___________
IN RE: DENNIS LEE WALLS,
Petitioner
____________________________________
On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(Related to Civ. No. 3-19-cv-01288)
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
October 6, 2022
Before: CHAGARES, Chief Judge, HARDIMAN, and PHIPPS, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: October 31, 2022)
_________
OPINION*
_________
PER CURIAM
In July 2019, Dennis Walls filed a habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in
the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. In September
2022, Wells filed a petition for a writ of mandamus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651 with
this Court, requesting an order directing the District Court to rule on the petition and a
pending bail motion, to appoint counsel, and to conduct a hearing on his claims.
* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
In an order entered October 4, 2022, the District Court denied the § 2254 petition,
declined to issue a certificate of appealability, and dismissed the bail motion as moot.
Thus, to the extent that Walls sought a ruling on his petition and motion, he has obtained
the relief he requested. And because the matter has been dismissed, an order directing
the District Court to hold a hearing or appoint counsel would have no effect on the
proceedings. Because there is no effective relief we can grant him, his request for
mandamus relief is moot, and we will dismiss the petition. See Blanciak v. Allegheny
Ludlum Corp., 77 F.3d 690, 698-99 (3d Cir. 1996) (noting that “[i]f developments occur
during the course of adjudication that eliminate a plaintiff's personal stake in the outcome
of a suit or prevent a court from being able to grant the requested relief, the case must be
dismissed as moot”).

-- 2 of 2 --