In Re: Harry James v. , 588 F. App'x 218 ( 2014 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1634
In Re: HARRY SHAROD JAMES,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(5:14-hc-02105-F)
Submitted: November 21, 2014 Decided: December 17, 2014
Before KEENAN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Harry Sharod James, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Harry Sharod James, a North Carolina prisoner,
petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the
district court to transfer his recently filed habeas petition to
the Mecklenburg County Superior Court. * We conclude that James
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 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 James
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
*
While James’ habeas petition was initially filed in the
Eastern District of North Carolina, it has since been
transferred to the Western District of North Carolina. James
has filed a supplement stating that he objects to the
jurisdiction of the Western District of North Carolina as well.
2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3