Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Rolando Otero v. United States Attorney General, State of Florida, Richard Gerstein
832 F.2d 141
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1987-11-13
- Topic
- general
finding that a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another | noting that “a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non- prosecution of another.” | finding that a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another | finding that a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another | explaining that “[a] private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another . . . [and] prosecutorial discretion may not be controlled by a writ of mandamus.” (citations omitted) | stating, “a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another” | dismissing petition for writ of mandamus because private citizen cannot compel the investigation and prosecution of another | stating, “a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another” | stating, “a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non- prosecution of another” | stating, “a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non- prosecution of another” | affirming dismissal of complaint seeking investigation and prosecution of former state attorney | “[A] private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another.” | “[A] private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another.” | “[A] private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non- prosecution of another.” | “[A] private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another.” | “[A] private citizen has no judicial cognizable interest in the prosecution or non- prosecution of another.” | “[A] private citizen has no judicial cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another.” | “[A] private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another.”
Citator
- Cited by
- 45 opinions
Rolando Otero filed a complaint seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus to compel defendants to investigate and prosecute a former Florida State Attorney. The district court properly dismissed the complaint with prejudice for two reasons.
First, a private citizen has no judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or non-prosecution of another. Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619, 93 S.Ct. 1146, 1149, 35 L.Ed.2d 536 (1973).
Second, prosecutorial discretion may not be controlled by a writ of mandamus. Powell v. Katzenbach, 359 F.2d 234 (D.C.Cir.1965), *142 cer t. denied, 384 U.S. 906, 86 S.Ct. 1341, 16 L.Ed.2d 359 (1966).
AFFIRMED.