In Re: James Blakely , 446 F. App'x 616 ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-1529
In Re: JAMES G. BLAKELY, a/k/a Jimmy G. Blakely,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (4:10-cv-03280-MBS)
Submitted: August 24, 2011 Decided: September 13, 2011
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James G. Blakely, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James G. Blakely petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order compelling the district court to provide him
with copies of documents filed in his prior 28 U.S.C. § 2254(2006) proceedings. We conclude that Blakely 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 (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 and indisputable right to the relief sought.” In re
Braxton, 258 F.3d 250, 261 (4th Cir. 2001).
Blakely has failed to demonstrate a clear and
indisputable right to the relief sought. 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
2