Matter of Paskins

Summary

The Court dismissed Paskins’s petition for a writ of mandamus because he had adequate appellate and postconviction remedies, including an appeal that was dismissed for procedural failures and a postconviction motion that was summarily dismissed. The Court held that mandamus could not substitute for a properly filed appeal and noted that Paskins’s premise that his 1994 violation-of-probation sentence lacked probation was incorrect. The Court deemed the petition legally frivolous and warned that future frivolous filings could result in a filing injunction.