Daniel Sheehan v., No. 19-2833 (3d Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

HLD-009 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 19-2833 ___________ In re: DANIEL PATRICK SHEEHAN, Petitioner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

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.