In Re: Williams v.

174 F. App'x 769

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 6, 2006
• Docket: 05-7618
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Gary Buterra Williams, a pre-trial detainee at the Richmond City Jail, petitions for a writ of mandamus. Williams seeks an order compelling the Sheriff of the City of Richmond to fill a prescription for corrective lenses.

Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and there are no other means to obtain the requested relief. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826-27 (4th Cir.1987). 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); Beard, 811 F.2d at 826. This court does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials. See Gurley v. Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir.1969).

The relief sought by Williams 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