James W. Brammer v. Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles People of the State of California

66 F.3d 334 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James W. BRAMMER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR the COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; People of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 94-55362. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 5, 1995. * Decided Sept. 8, 1995. Before: GOODWIN, WIGGINS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 James W. Brammer, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his petition for writ of mandamus. He contends the district court erred when it refused to file his action without prepayment of fees. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we affirm. 3 On February 15, 1994, the district court lodged Brammer's petition for writ of mandamus. Brammer's pro se mandamus petition alleged that appellate counsel failed to raise issues which Brammer wanted argued; the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence; and the…