Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
12-1209•In re: Matthew Johnson, a/k/a Michael Roy Johnson
12-1209Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit25.06.2012
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1209
In re: MATTHEW JOHNSON, a/k/a Michael Roy Johnson,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(5:04-cr-00065-RLV-DCK-1)
Submitted: June 21, 2012 Decided: June 25, 2012
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Matthew Johnson, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Matthew Johnson petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order directing the district court to order the
Government to return his property and pay all related court
costs. We conclude that Johnson is not entitled to mandamus
relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
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 sought by Johnson is not available by
way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of
mandamus.* We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
* To the extent Johnson complains of undue delay in the
district court with respect to his motion for reconsideration,
we deny the petition as moot in light of the district court’s
ruling on this motion on April 20, 2012.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
PETITION DENIED
-- 3 of 3 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.