In Re: Harry James, No. 14-1634 (4th Cir. 2014)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1634 In Re: HARRY SHAROD JAMES, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:14-hc-02105-F) Submitted: November 21, 2014 Before KEENAN and Circuit Judge. HARRIS, Decided: Circuit Judges, December 17, 2014 and DAVIS, Senior Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harry Sharod James, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Harry Sharod James, a North Carolina prisoner, petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to transfer his recently filed habeas petition to the Mecklenburg County Superior Court. * We conclude that James 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 509, 394, 402 516-17 available Kerr (1976); (4th only clear right to the relief sought. the 2003). States States v. Further, petitioner has a In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). used as a substitute for appeal. United United Cir. when v. Mandamus may not be In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). The relief sought by James is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. dispense with oral argument because * the facts and in We legal While James’ habeas petition was initially filed in the Eastern District of North Carolina, it has since been transferred to the Western District of North Carolina. James has filed a supplement stating that he objects to the jurisdiction of the Western District of North Carolina as well. 2 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 3

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.