Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: Jimmy Wright V., 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views3 pages
    The petitioner, Jimmy Alonzo Wright, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to decide whether he is entitled to relief under a certain case. The court denied the petition. Mandamus is a drastic remedy only available in extraordinary circumstances. Wright did not meet the heavy burden of showing he had no other means to obtain relief and a clear entitlement to it. While unreasonable delay could warrant mandamus, the record did not disclose such delay. The relief Wright sought also was not available through mandamus. The court therefore denied the petition.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-01-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-1963

    Original Title

    In Re: Jimmy Wright v., 4th Cir. (2015)

    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 petitioner, Jimmy Alonzo Wright, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to decide whether he is entitled to relief under a certain case. The court denied the petition. Mandamus is a drastic remedy only available in extraordinary circumstances. Wright did not meet the heavy burden of showing he had no other means to obtain relief and a clear entitlement to it. While unreasonable delay could warrant mandamus, the record did not disclose such delay. The relief Wright sought also was not available through mandamus. The court therefore denied the petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    8 views3 pages

    In Re: Jimmy Wright V., 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The petitioner, Jimmy Alonzo Wright, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to decide whether he is entitled to relief under a certain case. The court denied the petition. Mandamus is a drastic remedy only available in extraordinary circumstances. Wright did not meet the heavy burden of showing he had no other means to obtain relief and a clear entitlement to it. While unreasonable delay could warrant mandamus, the record did not disclose such delay. The relief Wright sought also was not available through mandamus. The court therefore denied the petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-1963

    In Re:

    JIMMY ALONZO WRIGHT, a/k/a Jimmy Alfonzo Wright,


    Petitioner.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.


    (3:06-cr-00006-RJC-1; 3:12-cv-00460-RJC)

    Submitted:

    January 20, 2015

    Decided:

    January 27, 2015

    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Jimmy Alonzo Wright, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Jimmy Alonzo Wright petitions for a writ of mandamus,
    seeking an order directing the district court to decide whether
    he is entitled to relief under United States v. Simmons, 649
    F.3d 237 (4th Cir. 2011) (en banc).

    Wright also appears to

    allege that the district court has delayed ruling on unspecified


    matters.

    We deny the petition.


    Mandamus

    is

    drastic

    extraordinary circumstances.

    remedy

    to

    be

    used

    only

    in

    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).

    Mandamus relief is available only

    when there are no other means by which the relief sought could
    be granted, and should not be used as a substitute for appeal.
    Id. at 517.

    The party seeking mandamus relief bears the heavy

    burden of showing he has no other adequate means to obtain the


    relief sought and that his entitlement to relief is clear and
    indisputable.

    Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33,

    35 (1980).
    While unreasonable delay may be a basis upon which to
    grant a mandamus petition, see Johnson v. Rogers, 917 F.2d 1283,
    1285 (10th Cir. 1990), the record does not disclose such delay
    in the district court.

    Further, the relief Rogers seeks under

    Simmons is not available by way of mandamus.

    Accordingly,

    although

    we

    grant

    leave

    to

    proceed

    in

    forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition.

    We dispense with

    oral

    contentions

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    the
    in

    the

    facts

    and

    material

    legal
    before

    the

    court

    are
    and

    argument would not aid the decisional process.


    PETITION DENIED

    You might also like