In Re: Williams

381 F. App'x 284
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 4, 2010
Docket09-2112
StatusUnpublished

This text of 381 F. App'x 284 (In Re: Williams) 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: Williams, 381 F. App'x 284 (4th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Larry Sinclair Williams petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to grant relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2009) motion. We conclude that Williams 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).

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 Williams 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

In Re Lockheed Martin Corp.
503 F.3d 351 (Fourth Circuit, 2007)
United States v. Moussaoui
333 F.3d 509 (Fourth Circuit, 2003)
First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Baker
860 F.2d 135 (Fourth Circuit, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
381 F. App'x 284, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-williams-ca4-2010.