In re: Dominic Asquith

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedApril 25, 2023
Docket23-1139
StatusUnpublished

This text of In re: Dominic Asquith (In re: Dominic Asquith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re: Dominic Asquith, (4th Cir. 2023).

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1139 Doc: 18 Filed: 04/25/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1139

In re: DOMINIC ASQUITH, a/k/a Dom,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Prohibition to the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. (3:20-cr-00038-GMG-RWT-7)

Submitted: April 20, 2023 Decided: April 25, 2023

Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dominic Asquith, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1139 Doc: 18 Filed: 04/25/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Dominic Asquith petitions for a writ of prohibition, asking this court to order the

district court to release him from his pretrial detention facility and to place him on home

confinement. We conclude that Asquith is not entitled to the relief he seeks.

A writ of prohibition is a “drastic and extraordinary remedy which should be granted

only when the petitioner has shown h[er] right to the writ to be clear and undisputable and

that the actions of the court were a clear abuse of discretion.” In re Vargas, 723 F.2d 1461,

1468 (10th Cir. 1983). A writ of prohibition may not be used as a substitute for appeal.

Id.; see United States v. Foster, 296 F.2d 249, 251 (4th Cir. 1961). The relief sought by

Asquith is not available by way of prohibition. Accordingly, we deny Asquith’s petition

and all pending motions. 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In re: Dominic Asquith, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-dominic-asquith-ca4-2023.