FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT OCTOB ER 14 , 2005 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 11155 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 9 9 - 0 0 0 3 0 - CR- O C- 1 0 - G RJ U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s A L E X A N D E R H . G R I F F I N , a .k .a . B ig A l, a .k .a . B ig P ap a , a .k .a . Z a n d e r , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( O c t ob e r 14, 2005) B efo re B A R K E T T , H U L L an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: F eder al pri soner A l exander G ri ff i n, proceedi ng pro se, appeal s the di stri ct2

c o u r t’s d e n ia l o f

h is p e titio n f

o raw r it o f

m a n d a m u s to c o m p e l th e g o v e rn m e n t to f ile aF e d .R .C r im .P 3 5 ( b ) m o tio n f o rr e d u c tio n o f

h is s e n te n c e . O n ap p e a l, G r if f in m a i nt a i ns tha the pr ovi de d s ubs t a nt i a l a s s i s t a nc e t o the gove rnm e nta nd tha tthe g o v e rn m e n t h a d a n o b lig a tio n to h o n o rth e o r a l p r o m is e s o f g o v e rn m e n t a g e n ts to f i l e aR ul e 35( b) m ot i on on hi s be ha l f . A l though G r i f

f i n c onc e de s tha tthe go vernm entagent s onl y m ade oral prom i se s t o fi l e aR ul e 35(b) m ot i on , as op po se d t o a w ri tt en contra ct , G ri ff i n argues thathe no nethel es s provi ded in f o rm a tio n th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t u s e d in o b ta in in g c o n v ic tio n s o f o th e rin d iv id u a ls a nd, thus , w e s houl d or de rthe i s s ua nc e of the w r i tof

m a nda m us t o r e m e dy the gove rnm e nt ’ s br e a c h of the or a l a gr e e m e nt . G r i f f i n a l s o r e que s t s tha tw e f ol l ow the a na l y s i s ut i l i z e d by the S upr e m e C our ti n W a de v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 504 U . S . 181, 11 2 S . C t . 18 40 , 11 8 L . E d. 2d 52 4 (19 92 ), w hi ch prov i ded thatthe di stri ctcourt coul d rem edy the go vernm ent ’ s r ef usal t o fi l e aR ul e 35(b) m ot i on i f the court f o u n d th a t th e r e f

u s a l w a s b a s e d o n a n u n c o n s titu tio n a l m o tiv e . U nde r28 U . S . C . § 1361, di s tr i c tc our t s ha ve “ or i gi na l j ur i s di c t i on of a ny ac t i on i n the nature of m andam us t o com pel an offi ce r or e m pl oyee of the U ni t ed S t a t e s . . . t o pe r f

orm aduty ow e d t o the pl a i nt i f f . ” W he the rt o i s s ue aw r i tof m a n d a m u s is w ith in th e d is c r e tio n o f th e c o u r t to w h ic h th e p e titio n is a d d r e s s e d . K e rrv . U .S . D is t. C t. F o rth e N . D is t. o f C a lif o rn ia , 4 2 6 U .S . 3 9 4 , 4 0 3 , 9 6 S .C t.3

2119, 2124, 48 L . E d. 2d 725 ( 1976) ; s e e a l s o U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D e ns on, 603 F . 2d 1 1 4 3 , 1 1 4 6 ( 5 th C ir . 1 9 7 9 ) ( e x p la in in g th a t “[ t]h e S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s r e p e a te d ly s ta te d in g e n e r a l te rm s th a t is s u a n c e o f aw r it o f m a n d a m u s lie s in la r g e p a r t w ith in th e d is c r e tio n o f

th e c o u r t” ) . M oreover, m andam us i s adras t i c r em edy j ust i fi ed by “ on l y e xcept i on al c i r c um s t a nc e s . ” I n r e B e l l S outh C orp. , 334 F . 3d 941, 953 ( 11th C i r . 2003) . “ T he party s ee ki ng m andam us has the bu rden of dem on stra t i ng thati t s r i gh tt o i ss uance of the w r i ti s c l e a ra nd i ndi s put abl e . ” I d. ( quot a t i on om i tt e d) . “ [ A ] w r i tof m andam us i s i nt ended t o p rovi de a r em edy f or a pl ai nt i ff

on l y i f he has exhaust ed al l other a venu es of re l i ef and o nl y i f the defendantow es hi m a c l ea r nondi s c r e t i ona ry duty . ” C a s h v. B a rnha r t , 327 F . 3d 1252, 1258 ( 11th C i r . 2003) ( q u o ta tio n o m itte d ) .

Up o n r e v i e w o f

th e r e c o r d a n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f th e p a r t i e s ’ b r i e f

s , we di sc ern n o revers i bl e e rr or. G ri ff i n h as no tshow n the except i on al ci rc um st ance s nece ss ary t o w arra nti ss uance of the w ri t . T he pl eaagre em entexec ut ed betw ee n G ri ff i n and the go vernm entst at ed that“ the det erm i nat i on as t o w hether ‘s u b s ta n tia l a s s is ta n c e ’ h a s b e e n p r o v id e d o rw h a t ty p e o f m o tio n r e la te d th e r e to w ill b e f ile d , if a n y , r e s ts s o le ly w ith th e U n ite d S ta te s A tto rn e y f o rth e M id d le D i s tr i c tof

F l or i da . ” I ti s c l e a r , the n, tha tthe gove rnm e ntdoe s notow e G r i f f i n a4

n o n d is c r e tio n a ry d u ty to f ile aR u le 3 5 ( b ) m o tio n r e q u e s tin g ar e d u c tio n in h is s e nt e nc e . T he r e f

or e , t o the e xt e ntG r i f

f i n a r gue s tha tthe gove rnm e ntbr e a c he d the a gr e e m e nt , hi s a r gum e nti s w i thoutm e r i tbe c a us e the gove rnm e ntw a s unde rno m a n d a to ry d u ty , p u r s u a n t to th e p le aa g r e e m e n t, to f ile th e R u le 3 5 ( b ) m o tio n . A dd i t i on al l y, there i s no evi dence i n the re cord supp ort i ng G ri ff i n’ s c on t ent i on that gove rnm e nta ge nt s m a de a n or a l a gr e e m e ntw i th G r i f f i n tha tw oul d bi nd the g o v e rn m e n t a n d r e q u ir e it to f ile aR u le 3 5 ( b ) m o tio n . I n s hor t , G r i f

f i n f a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h a“ c l e a ra nd i ndi s put abl e ” r i ghtt o the i s s ua nc e of

aw r i tof m a nda m us , a nd, thus , w e a f f i rm the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s de ni a l of G ri ff i n’ s pet i t i on for s uch w ri t . B ec ause w e c an af fi rm on the foregoi ng , w e nee d notr e a c h the gove rnm e nt ’ s a l t e rna t i ve a r gum e nt s tha tG r i f f i n c oul d ha ve s ought r e l i e f unde r28 U . S . C . § 2255( 4) a nd i s pr e c l ude d f r om r e l i e f

unde rthe l a w of

the c a s e d o c tr in e . AF F I RME D.