Watkins v. Unknown

E.D. Virginia

Watkins v. Unknown

DecidedAugust 28, 2025

Docket3:25-cv-00634

StatusUnknown

This text of Watkins v. Unknown (Watkins v. Unknown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Watkins v. Unknown, (E.D. Va. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division DEONDRE’ WATKINS, Plaintiff,

Vv. Civil Action No. 3:25cv634 UNKNOWN, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, submitted a letter indicating that he is having trouble obtaining records from his criminal case in the Circuit Court for the City of Norfolk so he “can get back in court.” (ECF No. 1.) It is unclear exactly what action Plaintiff seeks from this Court. However, it appears that he wishes this Court to order the state court to provide him with certain records. Plaintiff fails to identify the procedural vehicle that would authorize the action he seeks. Moreover, this Court lacks jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials. In re Gurley, 247 F. App’x 437, 438 (4th Cir. 2007) (citing Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg Cty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969)). Therefore, the action will be DISMISSED. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff should direct his request to the Virginia state courts. An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: O8 las las cof Richmond, Virginia United States District Judge

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division DEONDRE’ WATKINS, Plaintiff,

Vv. Civil Action No. 3:25cv634 UNKNOWN, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, submitted a letter indicating that he is having trouble obtaining records from his criminal case in the Circuit Court for the City of Norfolk so he “can get back in court.” (ECF No. 1.) It is unclear exactly what action Plaintiff seeks from this Court. However, it appears that he wishes this Court to order the state court to provide him with certain records. Plaintiff fails to identify the procedural vehicle that would authorize the action he seeks. Moreover, this Court lacks jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials. In re Gurley, 247 F. App’x 437, 438 (4th Cir. 2007) (citing Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg Cty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969)). Therefore, the action will be DISMISSED. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff should direct his request to the Virginia state courts. An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: O8 las las cof Richmond, Virginia United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Watkins v. Unknown, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watkins-v-unknown-vaed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack