Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-01966/USCOURTS-ca4-19-01966-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Keven A. Morgan
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1966

In re: KEVEN A. MORGAN,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:19-hc-02153-M)

Submitted: February 20, 2020 Decided: February 24, 2020

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keven A. Morgan, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1966 Doc: 13 Filed: 02/24/2020 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Keven A. Morgan petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order dismissing his 

North Carolina criminal charges, directing the North Carolina Department of Public Safety 

to immediately release him, and directing the district court to rule in his favor on his 

pending 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2018) petition. We conclude that Morgan is not entitled to 

mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary 

circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re 

Murphy-Brown, LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is 

available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. Murphy-Brown, 

907 F.3d at 795. This court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against 

state officials, Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg Cty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th 

Cir. 1969), and does not have jurisdiction to review final state court orders, D.C. Court of 

Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983). The relief sought by Morgan is not 

available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, we deny the petition for 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

USCA4 Appeal: 19-1966 Doc: 13 Filed: 02/24/2020 Pg: 2 of 2