In re: Rigoberto H. Portillo v.
This text of 585 F. App'x 195 (In re: Rigoberto H. Portillo v.) 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.
Opinion
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Rigoberto Hernandez-Portillo petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order granting him inter alia relief in his criminal proceeding. We conclude that Hernandez-Portillo is not entitled to mandamus relief.
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). Moreover, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re *196 Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir.2007).
The relief sought by Hernandez-Portillo 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 this 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
585 F. App'x 195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rigoberto-h-portillo-v-ca4-2014.