In re: Anthony Cook v. n


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion to procced in forma pauperis granted. Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) and other pending motions denied [999941769-2]; [999994341-2]; [999945827-2]. Originating case number: 4:16-cv-02939-MBS-TER. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000026503]. Mailed to: Anthony Cook, Lawrence Crawford, David Duren and Yahya Muquit. [16-2141]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-2141 Doc: 31 Filed: 02/21/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2141 In re: ANTHONY COOK; DAVID DUREN; YAHYA MUQUIT; LAWRENCE CRAWFORD, Petitioners. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Submitted: February 16, 2017 (4:16-cv-02939-MBS-TER) Decided: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. DUNCAN, February 21, 2017 Circuit Judge, and Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Anthony Cook, David Petitioners Pro Se. Duren, Yahya Muquit, Lawrence Crawford, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-2141 Doc: 31 Filed: 02/21/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 seek forms PER CURIAM: Petitioners including writs Petitioners of also several mandamus seek to against proceed of mandamus multiple in forma relief, federal pauperis judges. and have filed motions for a ruling of law, for recusal, and for this court to reconsider its previous orders in this and related appeals. 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). We have reviewed Petitioners not filings conclude that extraordinary circumstances exist warranting mandamus relief. To the extent challenge the established and that Petitioners have Petitioners’ district court’s rulings in their respective district court actions, or this court’s prior orders, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). to the judges extent of this participation Petitioners court in be their ask that ordered district to respective 2 court recuse actions judges themselves or And or from appeals, Appeal: 16-2141 Doc: 31 Filed: 02/21/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 Petitioners have not established extra-judicial bias. See In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826-27 (4th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, although we grant Petitioners’ applications to proceed in Petitioners’ forma pauperis, other pending we deny motions. mandamus We dispense relief and 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. 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?