In Re. Paul Leslie Cox v., (4th Cir. 2011)
Linked as:
Text
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1026
In re: PAUL LESLIE COX,
Petitioner.
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus
Submitted: July 28, 2011 Decided: August 1, 2011
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paul Leslie Cox, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Paul Leslie Cox petitions for a writ of mandamus or prohibition seeking an order from this court to the South Carolina Attorney General to provide him with copies of his trial transcripts from 1987, copies of his warrants and indictments, and a copy of the statute of limitations. He also seeks answers to specific legal inquiries, and a copy of the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, and Title 42 of the United States Code. We conclude that Cox is not entitled to mandamus or prohibition relief.
Mandamus relief and prohibition are drastic remedies 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); In re Vargas, 723 F.2d 1461, 1468 (10th Cir. 1983). Further, these writs are 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); In re Banker's Trust Co., 775 F.2d 545, 547 (3d Cir. 1985).
The relief sought by Cox is not available by way of mandamus or prohibition. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Sponsored links
