Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • In Re: Dudley, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views3 pages
    The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals denied Sean Lamont Dudley's petition for a writ of mandamus in which he asked the court to: (1) order the district court to adjudicate matters currently stalled on its docket; (2) recall its mandate affirming the district court's judgment; or (3) give sua sponte consideration to whether the district court had authority to accept his guilty plea. The court found that Dudley did not meet the requirements for mandamus relief because the district court had recently disposed of Dudley's stalled motions and his remaining requests did not present a clear and indisputable right to relief. Therefore, the court denied Dudley's mandamus petition.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-04-07 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-1871

    Original Title

    In re: Dudley, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals denied Sean Lamont Dudley's petition for a writ of mandamus in which he asked the court to: (1) order the district court to adjudicate matters currently stalled on its docket; (2) recall its mandate affirming the district court's judgment; or (3) give sua sponte consideration to whether the district court had authority to accept his guilty plea. The court found that Dudley did not meet the requirements for mandamus relief because the district court had recently disposed of Dudley's stalled motions and his remaining requests did not present a clear and indisputable right to relief. Therefore, the court denied Dudley's mandamus petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views3 pages

    In Re: Dudley, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals denied Sean Lamont Dudley's petition for a writ of mandamus in which he asked the court to: (1) order the district court to adjudicate matters currently stalled on its docket; (2) recall its mandate affirming the district court's judgment; or (3) give sua sponte consideration to whether the district court had authority to accept his guilty plea. The court found that Dudley did not meet the requirements for mandamus relief because the district court had recently disposed of Dudley's stalled motions and his remaining requests did not present a clear and indisputable right to relief. Therefore, the court denied Dudley's mandamus petition.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 09-1871

    In Re:

    SEAN LAMONT DUDLEY, a/k/a John D. Brown,


    Petitioner.

    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

    Submitted:

    March 16, 2010

    (5:97-cr-00001-RLV)

    Decided:

    April 7, 2010

    Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Sean Lamont Dudley, Petitioner Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Sean Lamont Dudley has petitioned this court for a
    writ of mandamus.
    (i)

    order

    the

    In his petition, Dudley asks this court to:


    district

    currently

    stalled

    affirming

    the

    on

    court

    its

    district

    to

    docket;

    courts

    adjudicate

    the

    matters

    (ii)

    its

    mandate

    recall

    judgment;

    or

    (iii)

    give

    sua

    sponte consideration to whether the district court had authority


    to

    accept

    (requiring

    his
    a

    guilty

    district

    plea

    under

    court

    to

    Fed.

    R.

    determine

    Crim.

    P.

    whether

    11(b)(3)

    there

    is

    factual basis for a guilty plea).


    To

    obtain

    mandamus

    relief,

    petitioner

    must

    show

    that:
    (1) he has a clear and indisputable right to the
    relief sought; (2) the responding party has a clear
    duty to do the specific act requested; (3) the act
    requested is an official act or duty; (4) there are no
    other adequate means to attain the relief he desires;
    and (5) the issuance of the writ will effect right and
    justice in the circumstances.
    In

    re

    Braxton,

    quotation

    marks

    258

    F.3d

    and

    250,

    citation

    261

    (4th

    Cir.

    omitted).

    We

    2001)
    have

    (internal
    considered

    Dudleys petition and the district court docket sheet and find
    that

    the

    district

    stalled motions.
    requests

    for

    court

    has

    recently

    disposed

    of

    Dudleys

    We further conclude that Dudleys remaining

    relief

    do

    not

    meet

    the

    exacting

    requirements

    necessary for the issuance of a writ of mandamus.

    Accordingly,

    although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and grant


    2

    Dudleys motion to supplement his mandamus petition, we deny the


    mandamus petition.
    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.
    PETITION DENIED

    You might also like