Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

381 F. App'x 284

In Re: Williams

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided June 4, 2010

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2010-06-04

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (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 · United States v. Moussaoui

Decided 2010-06-04

¶1 Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

¶2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

¶3 Larry Sinclair Williams petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to grant relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2009) motion. We conclude that Williams is not entitled to mandamus relief. ■

¶4 Mandamus relief 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); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, 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).

¶5 Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir.2007). The relief sought by Williams 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.

¶6 PETITION DENIED.

/381/fappx/284 · .json · Public domain