In re: LeAnthony Winston, No. 21-1785 (4th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-1785 In re: LEANTHONY WINSTON, a/k/a Locks, a/k/a Lee Lee, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (No. 2:20-cr-00108-RGD-DEM-1) Submitted: October 19, 2021 Decided: November 2, 2021 Before AGEE, WYNN, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. LeAnthony Winston, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: LeAnthony Winston petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to dismiss the indictments in his criminal case. We conclude that Winston is not entitled to mandamus relief. Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown, LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other adequate means to attain the relief [he] desires.” Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). The relief sought by Winston is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition. We deny Winston’s motions for release from pretrial detention, a temporary restraining order, and a stay pending appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
