Filed: Aug. 06, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6214 In Re: JAMES EDWARD ELLERBE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-97-100-BR) Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: August 6, 2002 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edward Ellerbe, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James E. Ellerbe filed this petition for
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6214 In Re: JAMES EDWARD ELLERBE, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-97-100-BR) Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: August 6, 2002 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edward Ellerbe, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: James E. Ellerbe filed this petition for a..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-6214
In Re: JAMES EDWARD ELLERBE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-97-100-BR)
Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: August 6, 2002
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Edward Ellerbe, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James E. Ellerbe filed this petition for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order directing the United States Attorney for the
Eastern District of North Carolina to initiate the indictment and
prosecution of several individuals for alleged crimes committed in
relation to Ellerbe’s prosecution for aiding and abetting a
conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine. We have reviewed the
petition and find it completely meritless. Mandamus relief is
warranted only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief
sought and there are no other means available for seeking that
relief. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n,
860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th
Cir. 1988). No citizen has an enforceable right to insist on the
initiation of criminal proceedings. Linda R. S. v. Richard D.,
410
U.S. 614, 619 (1973). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ
of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2