Court Opinion

ID: 9388853
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-21 20:00:29.657322+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:23.290088
License: Public Domain

DLD-125                                                          NOT PRECEDENTIAL

                        UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                             FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
                                  ___________

                                       No. 23-1437
                                       ___________

                        IN RE: DARRELL SANFORD PRINCE,
                                                   Petitioner
                       ____________________________________

                      On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
           United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
                      (Related to E.D. Pa. Civ. No. 2:16-cv-06702)
                      ____________________________________

                     Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.
                                    April 13, 2023
              Before: JORDAN, SHWARTZ, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges

                              (Opinion filed: April 21, 2023)
                                       _________

                                         OPINION *
                                         _________

PER CURIAM

       In 2016, Darrell Prince filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Pennsylvania, raising claims related to that year’s presidential election. We

affirmed the district court’s order dismissing the case for lack of standing. See Prince v.

U.S. Gov’t, 697 F. App’x 134, 135 (3d Cir. 2017) (per curiam).

       In 2020, Prince filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of

*
 This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.
Columbia, raising claims related to that year’s presidential election. The district court’s

order of dismissal, predicated on Prince’s lack of standing, was affirmed on appeal. See

Prince v. Kobach, 848 F. App’x 2, 2-3 (D.C. Cir. 2021) (per curiam order).

       In 2023, Prince filed a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus. Among other

things, Prince requests that this Court reopen the above-referenced cases, “quell public

Controversy over the Election of 2020, and 2016,” answer certain questions about

“Legislative Apportionment” and “Election Mechanics,” and “[i]ssue orders for first-

priority processing of government records or Agency oversight to aid in investigations[.]”

       We conclude, after careful review of the record and Prince’s petition, that he

satisfies none of the criteria for mandamus relief. Cf. Hollingsworth v. Perry, 558 U.S.

183, 190 (2010) (per curiam) (requiring “that (1) no other adequate means [exist] to attain

the relief he desires, (2) the party’s right to issuance of the writ is clear and indisputable,

and (3) the writ is appropriate under the circumstances”) (citation and internal quotation

marks omitted). Accordingly, the petition will be denied.