In Re: Thomas Langston, No. 13-1936 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1936 In re: THOMAS EUGENE LANGSTON, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:13-cv-00780-CMH-IDD) Submitted: November 19, 2013 Before WYNN and Circuit Judge. FLOYD, Circuit Decided: November 21, 2013 Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Eugene Langston, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Thomas Eugene Langston petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order directing the district court to treat his previously filed successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition as Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4) motion. We conclude that Langston is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in Dist. extraordinary Court, Moussaoui, mandamus 426 333 relief circumstances. U.S. F.3d is 394, 509, 402 516-17 available (1976); (4th only clear right to the relief sought. Kerr Cir. when the v. United United States States 2003). v. Further, petitioner has a In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). The relief mandamus. sought by Langston is not available by way Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. dispense of with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.