JAMIE N. MOYE, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
CLERK, DEKALB COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A federal court cannot issue a writ of mandamus to compel a state court clerk to produce documents when mandamus is the sole relief sought.
A state prisoner filed a pro se petition in federal court seeking to compel a state court clerk to produce trial transcripts and documents for his sta…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse All Writs Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Jamie N. Moye, a prisoner of the State of Georgia, filed a pro se petition in the Northern District of Georgia requesting the court to compel the clerk of the DeKalb County Superior Coprt to comply with his request for production of the transcript and other documents relating to his state conviction. He. alleged a need for them as a basic tool necessary for the preparation of his state appeal process.
The district court, construing the request as a petition for a writ of mandamus, summarily dismissed it for failure to exhaust state remedies.
On appeal Moye alleges that he made numerous motions to the state court seeking production but has received no ruling thereon. The respondent herein has failed to file a brief.
Although the writ of mandamus was abolished by Fed.R.Civ.P. 81(b), federal courts may issue all writs neces sary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law, 28 U.S. C. § 1651. But a federal court lacks the general power to issue writs of mandamus to direct state courts and their judicial officers in the performance oí their duties where mandamus is the only relief sought. Lamar v. 118th Judicial District Court of Texas, 440 F. 2d 383 (5th Cir., 1971); Haggard v. Tennessee, 421 F. 2d 1384 (6th Cir., 1970).
Since the present request sought only mandamus relief, it was properly denied.
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Wright II), 654 F.2d 268 (3d Cir. 1981)
-
Russell v. Honorable Judge Lamar Knight, 488 F.2d 96 (5th Cir. 1973)
-
Mayfield v. Klevenhagen, 941 F.2d 346 (5th Cir. 1991)
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Haggard v. State OF Tenn. & Honorable Joseph D. Duncan, 421 F.2d 1384 (6th Cir. 1970)
- Lamar v. 118TH Jud. Dist. Court OF Tex., 440 F.2d 383 (5th Cir. 1971)