In Re: Rochelle v. , 353 F. App'x 789 ( 2009 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-2196
In Re: OKANG KAREEM ROCHELLE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (1:05-cr-00112-WO-1)
Submitted: November 19, 2009 Decided: December 1, 2009
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Okang Kareem Rochelle, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Okang Kareem Rochelle petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order directing release pending sentencing or a
status conference in the district court, and for the appointment
of a special judge to “preside over litigation who would ensure
that [his] rights governed by a fair and public hearing or trial
[are] respected and protected.” Pet. for Writ of Mandamus at 2.
We conclude that Rochelle is not entitled to mandamus relief.
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). Further,
mandamus is not a substitute for a direct appeal; it is a
drastic remedy that should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394,
402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987).
Rochelle fails to demonstrate extraordinary
circumstances or that his rights cannot be fully protected
through the established appellate process. Accordingly,
although we grant leave to proceed informa 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