Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: Donnie Sheffield, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Donnie Sheffield's petition for a writ of mandamus. Sheffield sought an order compelling the district court to act on several motions he had filed, including motions to appoint counsel and compel production of transcripts. However, the court determined that Sheffield was not entitled to mandamus relief because he currently had no cases pending before the district court and thus was not entitled to the relief sought in his motions. While the court granted Sheffield's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, it denied both his motion to expedite and overall petition for a writ of mandamus.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-08-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-1579

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Donnie Sheffield's petition for a writ of mandamus. Sheffield sought an order compelling the district court to act on several motions he had filed, including motions to appoint counsel and compel production of transcripts. However, the court determined that Sheffield was not entitled to mandamus relief because he currently had no cases pending before the district court and thus was not entitled to the relief sought in his motions. While the court granted Sheffield's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, it denied both his motion to expedite and overall petition for a writ of mandamus.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    4 views2 pages

    In Re: Donnie Sheffield, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Donnie Sheffield's petition for a writ of mandamus. Sheffield sought an order compelling the district court to act on several motions he had filed, including motions to appoint counsel and compel production of transcripts. However, the court determined that Sheffield was not entitled to mandamus relief because he currently had no cases pending before the district court and thus was not entitled to the relief sought in his motions. While the court granted Sheffield's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, it denied both his motion to expedite and overall petition for a writ of mandamus.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 11-1579

    In re:

    DONNIE WAYNE SHEFFIELD,

    Petitioner.

    On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus


    (4:07-cr-00769-TLW-1)
    Submitted:

    August 18, 2011

    Decided:

    August 22, 2011

    Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.


    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Donnie Wayne Sheffield, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Donnie

    Sheffield

    petitions

    for

    writ

    of

    mandamus

    seeking an order compelling the district court to act on several


    motions he has filed in that court.

    We conclude that Sheffield

    is not entitled to mandamus relief.


    Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
    only
    Dist.

    in

    extraordinary

    Court,

    Moussaoui,

    333

    426

    circumstances.

    U.S.

    F.3d

    394,

    509,

    402

    516-17

    Kerr

    (1976);

    v.

    United

    United

    States

    States

    (4th Cir. 2003).

    v.

    Further,

    mandamus 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).


    Sheffield

    has

    filed

    motions

    to

    appoint

    counsel

    and

    compel production of transcripts, but currently has no cases


    pending before the district court.

    Thus, he is not entitled to

    the relief he seeks.


    Accordingly,

    although

    we

    grant

    Sheffield

    leave

    to

    proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his motion to expedite and


    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

    You might also like