In re Boone

51 F. App'x 463
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedDecember 3, 2002
DocketNo. 02-7304
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 51 F. App'x 463 (In re Boone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Boone, 51 F. App'x 463 (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Leroy Boone petitions for a writ of mandamus. He seeks an order compelling the district court to order the government to prove the court had subject matter jurisdiction to convict him.

Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. See 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. See 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. See In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).

The relief sought by Boone 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.

PETITION DENIED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 F. App'x 463, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-boone-ca4-2002.