In re: Thomas Cross, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999651267-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999640346-2]. Originating case number: 5:15-hc-02144-FL. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999719992]. Mailed to: Thomas Cross, Jr.. [15-1917]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-1917 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/17/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1917 In re: THOMAS FRANKLIN CROSS, JR., Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:15-hc-02144-FL) Submitted: December 15, 2015 Before GREGORY Circuit Judge. and FLOYD, Decided: Circuit Judges, December 17, 2015 and DAVIS, Senior Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Franklin Cross, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-1917 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/17/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Thomas Franklin Cross, Jr., petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to order a state court judge to hold an evidentiary hearing. We conclude that Cross 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. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). The relief mandamus. sought by Cross is not available by way Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. dispense of with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this 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?