In re: James Burks, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000115010-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [1000115005-2] Originating case number: 1:93-cr-00460-CMH-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000178490]. Mailed to: James Burks. [17-1802]

Appeal: 17-1802

Doc: 5

Filed: 10/23/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1802

In re: JAMES K. BURKS, JR., a/k/a Howard Theodore Wright, a/k/a Nathan King, a/k/a
Derrick Baxter, a/k/a Marcus Allen, a/k/a Martin Wilson, a/k/a Marcus Williams,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:93-cr-00460-CMH-1)

Submitted: October 19, 2017

Decided: October 23, 2017

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James K. Burks, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 17-1802

Doc: 5

Filed: 10/23/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
James K. Burks, Jr., petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order from this
court directing the district court to act on his motion to show cause, which he filed in the
district court on May 17, 2017. 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 district court’s docket establishes that Burks’ action is proceeding and reveals
no undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, although we grant Burks’ application to
proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition. 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.

PETITION DENIED

2