In Re. Owens v., (4th Cir. 2008)
Linked as:
Text
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-1013
In Re: WILLIE J. OWENS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(6:02-cv-00261-CWH)
Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 29, 2008
Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Willie J. Owens, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Willie J. Owens petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order from this court directing the district court to grant the relief requested in a 28U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition that the district court had already denied. We conclude that Owens is not entitled to mandamus relief.
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 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).
Finally, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
The relief sought by Owens is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma 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.
PETITION DENIED
Sponsored links
