In re: James Roudabush, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999552379-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999552594-2]. Originating case number: 1:13-cr-00195-CMH-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999606391]. Mailed to: James Roudabush, Jr.. [15-1301]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-1301 Doc: 8 Filed: 06/22/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1301 In re: JAMES LESTER ROUDABUSH, JR., Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (No. 1:13-cr-00195-CMH-1) Submitted: June 18, 2015 Decided: June 22, 2015 Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Lester Roudabush, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-1301 Doc: 8 Filed: 06/22/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: James mandamus, Lester Roudabush, seeking an order Jr., from petitions this for court a writ directing of the district court to provide him with papers he believes he needs to file a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) or to appoint counsel to represent him. * We conclude that Roudabush is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. 135, 138 (4th In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d Cir. 1988). substitute for appeal. Mandamus may not be used as a In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). The relief sought by Roudabush is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. * In the petition, Roudabush also states that the district court has not ruled on his February 2015 motion seeking a copy of the trial transcript and presentence report or, in the alternative, appointment of counsel. To the extent Roudabush seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act on his motion, we find that the present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court. 2 Appeal: 15-1301 Doc: 8 Filed: 06/22/2015 We dispense with contentions are oral Pg: 3 of 3 argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 3

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?