Case Name: In re Ravanna S. BEY, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-07-23
Citations: 532 F. App'x 46
Docket Number: No. 13-2782
Parties: In re Ravanna S. BEY, Petitioner.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 532
Pages: 46–46

Head Matter:
In re Ravanna S. BEY, Petitioner.
No. 13-2782.
United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. RApp. P. June 27, 2013.
Opinion filed: July 23, 2013.
Ravanna S. Bey, Mays Landing, NJ, pro se.
Attorney General New Jersey, Office of Attorney General of New Jersey, Trenton, NJ, for Respondent.
United States Attorney New Jersey, Office of United States Attorney, Newark, NJ, for Nominal Respondent.
Before: AMBRO, SMITH and CHAGARES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Ravanna Stephens Bey, Jr., proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, petitions for a writ of mandamus compelling the Superi- or Court of New Jersey for Atlantic County to dismiss its ongoing criminal proceeding against Bey for lack of jurisdiction.
Mandamus is a drastic remedy available in only the most extraordinary circumstances. In re Diet Drugs Prods. Liab. Litig., 418 F.3d 372, 378 (3d Cir.2005). "A petitioner seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus must have no other adequate means to obtain the desired relief, and must show that the right to issuance is clear and indisputable." Madden v. Myers, 102 F.3d 74, 79 (3d Cir.1996).
In this matter, Bey has not shown that he has a clear and indisputable right to have this Court compel the Superior Court of New Jersey to dismiss his criminal proceeding. See id. Further, mandamus typically may be "used to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction or to compel it to exercise its authority when it is its duty to do so." In re Diet Drugs, 418 F.3d at 378 (internal quotation marks omitted). The Superior Court of New Jersey is not an "inferior court" of this Court, and, except in limited circumstances, federal courts do not have the power to compel state courts to act in a particular way. See Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Bhd. of Locomotive Eng'rs, 398 U.S. 281, 286, 90 S.Ct. 1739, 26 L.Ed.2d 234 (1970); Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 45, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971); In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 654 F.2d 268, 278-79 (3d Cir.1981). Accordingly, we deny Bey's petition for a writ of mandamus compelling the Superior Court of New Jersey to dismiss the criminal proceedings against him.
. Bey has been indicted for third degree forgery, uttering a forged instrument, and third degree theft by deception stemming from an episode where Bey allegedly cashed a check on which the name of the intended payee was altered. In his petition, Bey asserts that the Superior Court of New Jersey does not have jurisdiction over him, as he is a "Moorish American" citizen, and is not subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States per the laws of the Moorish American National Republic, the Thirteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and the Emancipation Proclamation. The Superior Court of New Jersey has rejected this argument.