In re: Rodney Justin

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998927123-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [998927121-2]. Originating case number: 1:09-cr-00066-JAB-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998977552]. Mailed to: Rodney Justin. [12-2056]

Download PDF
Appeal: 12-2056 Doc: 10 Filed: 11/08/2012 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-2056 In re: RODNEY K. JUSTIN, Petitioner. On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus. Submitted: September 21, 2012 (1:09-cr-00066-JAB-1) Decided: November 8, 2012 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rodney K. Justin, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 12-2056 Doc: 10 Filed: 11/08/2012 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Rodney K. Justin petitions for a writ of mandamus, requesting that this court order several attorneys involved in his trial and direct appeal to turn over to Justin certain legal records, and seeking that the district court be directed to give Justin access to various transcripts and to equitably toll the limitations period applicable to his anticipated 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that Justin has requested identical relief from the district court. Moreover, the district court in August 2012 referred each of Justin’s pending motions to a magistrate judge for resolution. Because it is clear that Justin may obtain relief in an alternate venue and that the district court has not unreasonably delayed in its adjudication of Justin’s relief is inappropriate in this case. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 assertions, mandamus Kerr v. United States (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Accordingly, although we grant Justin leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his 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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?