United States v. Dunkins

No. 99-10444
-1-
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-10444
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DOUGLAS RAY DUNKINS, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:92-CR-010-3-Y
- - - - - - - - - -
April 11, 2000
Before WIENER, DeMOSS, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Douglas Ray Dunkins, federal prisoner # 22619-077, appeals
the district court order denying his motion for the release of
grand jury transcripts, Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e). Because Dunkins
fails to meet his burden of showing a particularized need for the
grand jury materials, the district court did not abuse its
discretion by denying his request. See United States v.
Miramontez, 995 F.2d 56, 59 (5th Cir. 1993). The court’s
judgment is AFFIRMED.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 99-10444
-2-
Dunkins’ request that this court order the district court to
conduct an in camera hearing to determine the identity of a
confidential informant is DENIED. Mandamus relief is not
available to review discretionary acts. Giddings v. Chandler,
979 F.2d 1104, 1108 (5th Cir. 1992). The district court’s
decision whether to hold an in camera hearing is an exercise of
the court’s discretion. United States v. Orozco, 982 F.2d 152,
155 (5th Cir. 1993).
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --