In Re: Edward Floyd, Jr. v. , 551 F. App'x 63 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 13-2103
    In re:   EDWARD PETER FLOYD, JR.,
    Petitioner.
    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
    (3:10-cr-00154-1)
    Submitted:   January 21, 2014               Decided: January 23, 2014
    Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Edward Peter Floyd, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Edward     Peter          Floyd,   Jr.,     petitions           for   a   writ       of
    mandamus     seeking       an    order       granting    relief        on    a    prior     motion
    filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012).                                  We conclude that
    Floyd 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 Floyd is not available by way of
    mandamus.       Accordingly,            we    grant     leave     to    proceed        in   forma
    pauperis     and     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
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    PETITION DENIED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-2103

Citation Numbers: 551 F. App'x 63

Judges: Keenan, Motz, Per Curiam, Thacker

Filed Date: 1/23/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/31/2023