ODMAN v. HOLDER, No. 1:2012cv00899 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2012)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Richard W. Roberts on 5/21/2012. (ls, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OwenOdman, Petitioner, V. Eric Holder, Attorney General, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. JUN- 5 2012 Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptc, Courts for the District ot Columbra 12 0899 MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter, brought prose, is before the Court on its initial review of the petition for a writ of mandamus and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Upon review of the petition, the Court finds that petitioner has failed to state a claim for such extraordinary relief. It therefore will grant the in forma pauperis application and dismiss the petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (requiring dismissal of a prisoner's complaint upon a determination that the complaint, among other grounds, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted). The extraordinary remedy of a writ of mandamus is available to compel an "officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to plaintiff." 28 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner bears a heavy burden of showing that his right to a writ of mandamus is "clear and indisputable." In re Cheney, 406 F.3d 723, 729 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). Mandamus relief is not available when an adequate remedy exists to address the underlying claim. Petitioner, a prisoner at the Federal Correctional Institution in Jesup, Georgia, seeks an order to compel the United States Attorney General to comply with Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 ( 1963 ), Pet. at 1, by "directing ... the United Sates Attorney's Office for the Western District 3 of North Carolina to provide the Petitioner with [certain information]." !d. at 3-4. Petitioner is not entitled to mandamus relief for two reasons. First, the Freedom oflnformation Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, is the proper vehicle for obtaining records from United States agencies. Second, to the extent that petitioner is claiming that the United States withheld exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady, he has an adequate remedy under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to move the sentencing court to vacate his conviction. A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. ;) 4-/- United States District Judge Date: May_£--_/_, 2012 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.
