Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

194 F. App'x 161

In Re: Wilson v.

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided August 14, 2006

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2006-08-14

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · In Re First Federal Savings And Loan Association Of Durham · In Re Diana R Beard et Als

Decided 2006-08-14

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Robert M. Wilson petitions for writ of mandamus seeking an order reopening his federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). The district court dismissed Wilson’s habeas petition, originally asserted under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000), as time-barred. In the instant mandamus petition, Wilson asks this court to direct the district court to reopen his petition under § 2241. We conclude that Wilson 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% 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should be used only 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). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).

¶3 The relief sought by Wilson is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, 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.

/194/fappx/161 · .json · Public domain