Bailey v. Clerk of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City Criminal Division, No. 1:2015cv02929 - Document 3 (D. Md. 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Richard D Bennett on 10/7/2015. (c/m 10/07/2015 bus, Deputy Clerk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Bailey v. Clerk of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City Criminal Division Doc. 3 [:-IL[O U.S. DISTRICT COU;';T IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURWISTRiCT (H~.,' , ',' ,.' ':' FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND ARIBAILEY, 2015 OCT -7 * AH II: 58 CLEfU;'::: Petitioner, I'J.T * -'i:ICE BA.LT1:<DRE f"'r.~Ol tT'{ ",",,-,<$ CIVIL ACTION'N0~'RDBJ1'51-292'9 v. * CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BAL TIMORE CITY CRIMINAL DIVISION Respondent. * ****** MEMORANDUM OPINION The above-captioned action was filed with this Court on September 25,2015. Petitioner seeks to have this Court issue an Order to the Clerk for the Circuit Court for Baltimore CityCriminal Division directing that the Clerk docket Petitioner's Motion to Dismiss in his State criminal proceedings. ECF 1. Petitioner has filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (ECF 2) which shall be granted. Because Petitioner seeks to compel a certain action by the state and/or its agents, the Court concludes that the present matter is in the nature ofa writ of mandamus. 1361. See 28 U.S.C. S Federal district courts have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or one of its agencies to perform a duty owed to a petitioner. However, this federal district court has no mandamus jurisdiction over state employees and cannot compel the Maryland state courts to take any action in Petitioner's criminal case. Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, 411 F.2d 586,586-87 (4th Cir. 1969). Therefore, Petitioner's request for mandamus relief shall be denied. 1 Dockets.Justia.com A separate Order shall be entered reflecting the Opinion set forth herein. !) G:1''fJ6 g., Date ~ 2... -I /2It)D1~ J RICHARD D. BENNETT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
