Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

56 F. App'x 202

In re Floyd

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided February 28, 2003

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2003-02-28

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 2003-02-28

PER CURIAM.

¶1Elizabeth Marie Rushing Floyd petitions for a writ of mandamus. She seeks an order setting aside her conviction and sentence.

¶2Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 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). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).

¶3The relief sought by Floyd 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.

¶4PETITION DENIED.

/56/fappx/202 · .json · Public domain