Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

191 F. App'x 235

In Re: Blair v.

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided July 27, 2006

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2006-07-27

Relies on Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · Allied Chemical Corporation v. Daiflon Inc · In Re First Federal Savings And Loan Association Of Durham

Decided 2006-07-27

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Angela Gwen Blair petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order requiring the Government to file a Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 motion. We conclude that Blair is not entitled to mandamus relief.

¶2 Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987). The party seeking mandamus relief must show that she has no other means of obtaining the requested relief. Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980).

¶3 The relief sought by Blair is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

¶4 PETITION DENIED.

/191/fappx/235 · .json · Public domain