In Re: McRae v. ( 2003 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6519
In Re: MICHAEL SCOTT MCRAE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-81-16-02)
Submitted: July 10, 2003 Decided: July 16, 2003
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Scott McRae, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Michael Scott McRae has filed a petition for a writ of
mandamus challenging his 1981 federal conviction. Mandamus is a
drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary situations.
See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In
re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Mandamus relief is
only available when there are no other means by which the relief
sought could be granted, Beard, 811 F.2d at 826, and may not be
used as a substitute for appeal. In re Catawba Indian Tribe, 973
F.2d 1133, 1135 (4th Cir. 1992). The party seeking prohibition or
mandamus relief carries the heavy burden of showing that he has no
other adequate means to attain the relief he desires and that his
entitlement to such relief is clear and indisputable. Allied Chem.
Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 35 (1980).
McRae fails to make such a showing, because mandamus relief
may not be used as a substitute for appeal and collateral attack.
Because McRae may otherwise challenge his conviction, we deny his
petition for a writ of mandamus. We grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis in this court. 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