Case: 10-10539 Document: 00511300795 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/22/2010
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
November 22, 2010
No. 10-10539
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
STEWART AZELL CROSS,
Petitioner-Appellant
v.
RICK THALER, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION,
Respondent-Appellee
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:10-CV-403
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Stewart Azell Cross, Texas prisoner # 1089282, appeals the district court’s
dismissal of his mandamus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). He
argues that the federal courts should order the state appellate court to provide
copies of his trial records and transcripts so that he may use them to prepare a
state postconviction application. Cross also raises the merits of various
constitutional claims relating to his aggravated assault conviction and
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .
R. 47.5.4.
Case: 10-10539 Document: 00511300795 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/22/2010
No. 10-10539
revocation proceeding and contends that he could establish his entitlement to
relief on these allegations if he were given access to the trial records. We review
the district court’s dismissal for abuse of discretion. See Siglar v. Hightower, 112
F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997).
Cross has not established that the district court abused its discretion in
denying the requested relief. “[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.” Moye
v. Clerk, DeKalb County Superior Court, 474 F.2d 1275, 1275-76 (5th Cir. 1973).
The district court therefore lacked the authority to compel either the respondent
or a state court to loan Cross the desired records, regardless of the potential
merit of the constitutional claims Cross wishes to raise in postconviction
proceedings. See id. at 1276; Santee v. Quinlan, 115 F.3d 355, 356-57 (5th Cir.
1997). Consequently, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
2