598 F.2d 1126 (8th Cir. 1979), 79-8092, In re Green

Docket Nº:and 79-8092.
Citation:598 F.2d 1126
Party Name:In re Clovis Carl GREEN, Jr., Petitioner (four cases). In re Clovis Carl GREEN, Jr., and Steven D. Davis, Petitioners (three cases). Nos. 79-8075, 79-8078, 79-8079, 79-8081, 79-8089, 79-8091
Case Date:May 14, 1979
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 1126

598 F.2d 1126 (8th Cir. 1979)

In re Clovis Carl GREEN, Jr., Petitioner (four cases).

In re Clovis Carl GREEN, Jr., and Steven D. Davis,

Petitioners (three cases).

Nos. 79-8075, 79-8078, 79-8079, 79-8081, 79-8089, 79-8091

and 79-8092.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

May 14, 1979

Page 1127

Clovis Carl Green, Jr., pro se.

Before GIBSON, Chief Judge, and LAY, HEANEY, BRIGHT, ROSS, STEPHENSON, HENLEY and McMILLIAN, Circuit Judges.

LAY, Circuit Judge.

This court has now reviewed each of the above petitions for mandamus and for writ of prohibition filed on behalf of Clovis Carl Green, Jr. and Steven D. Davis. These petitions have been filed pro se. Upon review we are satisfied that each petition fails to state any legal basis for the issuance of a writ of mandamus or a writ of prohibition. Each petition is ordered denied.

In the year 1978 Clovis Carl Green, Jr. filed over 66 petitions for writ of mandamus in this court. None were granted. Since January 1 this court has received approximately 17 petitions for writs of mandamus and numerous other petitions and motions. Although most of the petitions state diverse grounds they basically set forth conclusory allegations of prejudice against the trial judges and magistrates of the Western District of Missouri; they relate to the failure to give the petitioner immediate evidentiary hearings on his petitions or the failure of the trial court or magistrate to immediately rule on his various diverse and sundry motions; many relate to the failure of the state to timely file responsive pleadings, etc. The vast majority of the allegations relate to the control of the district court's trial dockets. In an informal response to one of the above petitions Judge Ralston, Magistrate in the Western District of Missouri, has filed a thorough report as he has done in each of the many instances wherein Green has petitioned this court. It is obvious that Judge Ralston has been required to spend a good deal of time in writing informal reports to this court, keeping the court abreast with Green's many filings and the time-consuming history as to the gross abuse of the judicial process carried out by Green.

It is axiomatic that no petitioner or person shall ever be denied his right to the processes of the court. On the other hand Judge Ralston has written in response to the petition for a writ of mandamus in No...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP