Opinion
Case No. SC04-2010.
April 14, 2005.
Lower Tribunal No. 4D04-2875.
Petitioner has filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking reinstatement of his petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Fourth District Court of Appeal alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Because petitioner has failed to show that he is entitled to the reinstatement of his petition, he is not entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is hereby denied. See Huffman v. State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000) (stating that in order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, petitioner must show a clear legal right to performance of the requested act, that respondent has an indisputable legal duty to perform that act, and that no other adequate remedy exists.); Migliore v. City of Lauderhill, 415 So. 2d 62, 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (stating that mandamus "is not . . . proper to mandate the doing (or undoing) of a discretionary act"), approved, 431 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1983).
ANSTEAD, LEWIS, QUINCE and CANTERO, JJ., concur.
WELLS, J., would dismiss.