In Re: Arthur Jone
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999789377-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999789374-2] Originating case number: 2:99-cr-00362-DCN-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999829961]. Mailed to: Arthur Jones, Jr.. [16-1374]
Appeal: 16-1374
Doc: 7
Filed: 05/23/2016
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1374
In re: ARTHUR F. JONES, JR., a/k/a Arthur Palmer, a/k/a
June, a/k/a Junior,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(2:99-cr-00362-DCN-1)
Submitted:
May 18, 2016
Decided:
May 23, 2016
Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Arthur F. Jones, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-1374
Doc: 7
Filed: 05/23/2016
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Arthur
seeking
an
F.
Jones,
order
Jr.,
directing
petitions
the
for
district
criminal case to state court. *
a
writ
court
to
of
mandamus
remand
his
We conclude that Jones 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).
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal.
In
re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).
The
relief
mandamus.
sought
by
Jones
is
not
available
by
way
Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, we deny the petition for a 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
*
Jones mailed a courtesy
the district court, which then
in a new civil case. Jones v.
MBS (D.S.C., PACER No. 1). We
directed to this court.
copy of the instant petition to
proceeded to docket the petition
United States, No. 6:16-cv-01059understand Jones’ petition to be
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?