In Re: Dudley ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 10-2369
    In Re:   SEAN LAMONT DUDLEY, a/k/a John D. Brown,
    Petitioner.
    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.       (5:97-cr-00001-RLV-1)
    Submitted:   March 31, 2011                   Decided:   April 4, 2011
    Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, 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    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.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    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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.                In his petition, Dudley asks this court to
    order the district court to establish that it had authority to
    accept     his       guilty       plea   under       Fed.     R.        Crim.        P.     11(b)(3)
    (requiring       a   district       court     to     determine      whether          there     is    a
    factual basis for a guilty plea).                         To obtain mandamus relief, a
    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,         
    258 F.3d 250
    ,       261    (4th    Cir.       2001)        (internal
    quotation       marks      and     citation     omitted).               We    have        considered
    Dudley’s petition and conclude that Dudley is not entitled to
    mandamus relief.            Accordingly, we deny Dudley’s motion for leave
    to proceed in forma pauperis and deny the mandamus petition.                                        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.
    PETITION DENIED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-2369

Judges: Niemeyer, Shedd, Agee

Filed Date: 4/4/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024