In Re: Adib Makdessi
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999731878-2] Originating case number: 7:13-cv-00079-GEC-PMS,7:15-cv-00130-GEC-PMS. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: A. Makdessi. [16-1020]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
ADIB EDDIE RAMEZ MAKDESSI,
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (7:13-cv-00079-GEC-PMS;
May 31, 2016
June 2, 2016
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Adib Eddie Ramez Makdessi petitions for a writ of mandamus
directing that he be transferred from Red Onion State Prison on
Mandamus is a drastic remedy and should be used only in
Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S.
394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 51617 (4th Cir. 2003).
Further, mandamus relief is available only
when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought.
re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.
petition—and sought a transfer from Red Onion State Prison—in a
Makdessi v. Clarke, No. 7:15-cv-00130-GEC-PMS (W.D. Va.).
recommended rejecting Makdessi’s claims, and the district court
subsequently adopted this recommendation.
Makdessi did not file
a notice of appeal from the district court’s dispositive order,
which was entered on March 21, 2016.
Mandamus may not be used
Pg: 3 of 3
as a substitute for appeal, In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503
F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007), and the instant petition raises
issues that could have been—but were not—pursued in an appeal
petition for a writ of mandamus.
We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
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?