Title: Matter of Mahan

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
IN THE MATTER OF THE 
PETITION OF ROBERT J. 
MAHAN FOR A WRIT OF 
PROHIBITION 
§ 
§  No. 518, 2012 
§ 
§ 
 
 
Submitted: October 18, 2012 
 
Decided: 
November 5, 2012 
 
Before BERGER, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 5th day of November 2012, upon consideration of the petition of 
Robert J. Mahan for a writ of prohibition, and the State’s response thereto, it 
appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) Mahan, an inmate at the Howard R. Young Correctional 
Institution, requests that this Court issue a writ of prohibition directing 
Rebecca McBride, the director of the Department of Correction (“DOC”) 
records department, to apply his good time credits to the month during 
which he works at the West Side Law Library rather than to the following 
month, which is the DOC’s current procedure. 
 
(2) In its response, the State asserts that the petition should be 
dismissed, because:  (a) Rebecca McBride was never served with a copy of 
the petition; (b) Mahan has not paid the Supreme Court filing fee; and (c) a 
 
 
2
writ of prohibition may not be directed to an individual, but must be directed 
to a lower court.   
 
(3) A writ of prohibition is the legal counterpart to the equitable 
remedy of injunction, and may issue to prevent a lower court from 
proceeding in a matter where it has no jurisdiction, or to prevent it from 
exceeding its jurisdiction in a matter that is properly before it.1  The 
jurisdictional defect must be manifest on the record.2  Moreover, the burden 
is on the petitioner to demonstrate to this Court, by clear and convincing 
evidence, that the lower court is without jurisdiction in the matter or is 
attempting to exceed its jurisdiction.3 
 
(4) It is manifest that Mahan has not satisfied his burden.  A writ of 
prohibition is directed to a lower court, not to an individual, and concerns an 
alleged lack of jurisdiction on the part of that court.  Mahan’s allegations 
and his requested remedy do not satisfy the requirements for a writ of 
prohibition.  For that reason, the petition must be dismissed. 
 
                                                 
1 In re Hovey, 545 A.2d 626, 628 (Del. 1988). 
2 Id. 
3 Id. at 629. 
 
 
3
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for a writ of 
prohibition is DISMISSED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Jack B. Jacobs 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
         Justice