In re: Muhammed Abdullah

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999678612-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999689727-2] Originating case number: 5:04-cr-00371-F-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999722289]. Mailed to: Muhammed Abdullah. [15-2245]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-2245 Doc: 8 Filed: 12/21/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2245 In re: MUHAMMED MAHDEE ABDULLAH, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:04-cr-00371-F-1) Submitted: December 17, 2015 Decided: December 21, 2015 Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Muhammed Mahdee Abdullah, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 15-2245 Doc: 8 Filed: 12/21/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Muhammed Mahdee Abdullah petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order recalling the mandate in his direct criminal appeal. We conclude that Abdullah 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 sought by Abdullah is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. dispense 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?