In Re: Smith v. , 157 F. App'x 595 ( 2005 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7155
In Re: BERNARD SMITH,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(CA-05-120-7)
Submitted: November 22, 2005 Decided: December 6, 2005
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bernard Smith, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Bernard Smith petitions for writ of mandamus. He seeks
an order remanding his case to the district court with directions
to apply District of Columbia law instead of the sentencing
guidelines to his request for parole.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has
a clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. &
Loan Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus
is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances. 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 may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re
United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
With these criteria in mind, we conclude Smith is not
entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny his petition for
writ of mandamus. We grant Smith leave to proceed in forma
pauperis and deny his motion for appointment of counsel. 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 -