In re: Henry Miller, No. 18-1963 (4th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-1963 In re: HENRY EARL MILLER, a/k/a Stef, a/k/a Stefan, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (6:04-cr-00022-JMC-3; 6:17-cv-00805-JMC) Submitted: September 13, 2018 Decided: September 17, 2018 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Earl Miller, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Henry Earl Miller petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to adjudicate all the claims in his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. We conclude that Miller is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). The relief sought by Miller is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 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.
