Opinion
No. 01-2225
August 6, 2001
ORDER AND REASONS
A Petition for Writ of Mandamus was filed by Jerome Norman. In the petition, the prisoner solely seeks to have this Court order the Louisiana Supreme Court to render a ruling on his Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence in a Writ of certiorari. However, as the Court is prohibited from such an action, the writ must be denied.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, a court must review as soon as practicable a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer and on review, the court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Macal v. 203rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, 2001 WL 257942 (N.D.Tex. March 9, 2001) *1. Indeed both sections 191 5A(b) and 1915(e)(2)(B) provide for sua sponte dismissal is the Court finds that the complaint is "frivolous" or that it "fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." Id. As the court stated, "A complaint if frivolous, if it "lacks a n arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 1831-32, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989).
A federal court lacks the general power to issue writs of mandamus to direct state courts and their judicial officers in the performance of their duties where mandamus is the only relief sought." Westside-Marrero Jeep Eaale. Inc. v. Chrysler Corp., Inc., 1998 WL 186728 (E.D.La. April 17, 1998), citing Moye v. Clerk. DeKalb County Superior Court, 474 F.2d 1275, 1276 (5th Cir. 1973); accord Lowe v. 304th Judicial Dist. Court, No. 88-1584, 860 F.2d 436 (5th Cir. Oct.17, 1988) (unpublished opinion quoted in Humphrey v. Bowles, 125 F.R.D. 657, 666 n. 15 (N.D.Tex. 1988), affd, 888 F.2d 1390 (5th Cir. 1989)); Davis v. Lansing, 851 F.2d 72, 74 (2d Cir. 1988); Van Sickle v. Holloway, 791 F.2d 1431, 1436 n. 5 (10th Cir. 1986). As the only relief sought cannot be granted by this court, the Request for a Writ of Mandamus is frivolous and must be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (b)(1) and § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). See Santee v. Quinlan, 115 F.3d 355, 357 (5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous.