In Re: Kelley v. , 355 F. App'x 752 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-1738
    In Re:   REGGIE LAMAR KELLEY,
    Petitioner.
    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.       (3:04-cr-00998-CMC-1)
    Submitted:   November 16, 2009          Decided:    December 11, 2009
    Before WILKINSON and    NIEMEYER,   Circuit    Judges,   and   HAMILTON,
    Senior Circuit Judge.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Reggie Lamar Kelley, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Reggie Lamar Kelley, convicted and sentenced to 360
    months in prison for possession of a firearm in furtherance of a
    drug trafficking offense, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 924
    (c)(1)
    (2006), has petitioned this court for a writ of mandamus.                              In
    his petition, Kelley asks this court to vacate his sentence and
    remand his matter for resentencing because he alleges that the
    district court erroneously sentenced him as a career offender.
    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
    Kelley’s      petition    and     find     that       Kelley    does    not    meet    the
    exacting requirements necessary for the issuance of a writ of
    mandamus.      Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in
    forma pauperis, we 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: 09-1738

Citation Numbers: 355 F. App'x 752

Judges: Hamilton, Niemeyer, Per Curiam, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 12/11/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023