In re: Sonya Skinner

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 11, 2023
• Docket: 22-2179
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2179 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/11/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-2179

In re: SONYA SKINNER,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. (2:16-cr-00017-RCY-LRL-1)

Submitted: March 10, 2023 Decided: April 11, 2023

Before QUATTLEBAUM and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sonya Skinner, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-2179 Doc: 11 Filed: 04/11/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Sonya Skinner has filed two substantially similar petitions for a writ of mandamus

seeking an order correcting her sentence. We conclude that Skinner is not entitled to

mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary

circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown,

LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when

the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other adequate means to

attain the relief [he] desires.” Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal

quotation marks omitted). 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 Skinner is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly,

we deny the petitions for writ of mandamus and deny Skinner’s motion for release pending

a decision. 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.

PETITIONS DENIED