Filed: Jul. 28, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1532 In re: LONNIE BERNARD DAVIS, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 28, 2014 Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lonnie Bernard Davis, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lonnie Bernard Davis petitions for a writ of mandamus d
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1532 In re: LONNIE BERNARD DAVIS, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 28, 2014 Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lonnie Bernard Davis, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lonnie Bernard Davis petitions for a writ of mandamus di..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1532
In re: LONNIE BERNARD DAVIS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
Submitted: July 24, 2014 Decided: July 28, 2014
Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lonnie Bernard Davis, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lonnie Bernard Davis petitions for a writ of mandamus
directing the Richmond County courts in North Carolina to act.
We conclude that Davis is not entitled to the requested relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v.
Moussaoui,
333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Such relief is
available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the
relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n,
860 F.2d
135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988).
This court has no jurisdiction to grant mandamus
relief against state officials, Gurley v. Superior Court of
Mecklenburg Cnty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969), or to
review final state court orders, Dist. of Columbia Court of
Appeals v. Feldman,
460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983).
The relief sought by Davis is not available by way of
mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, 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
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2
