In Re: Chavis v. , 258 F. App'x 541 ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7105
In Re: HERBERT CHAVIS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:07-cv-00291)
Submitted: November 28, 2007 Decided: December 17, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Herbert Chavis, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Herbert Chavis petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking
an order compelling the district court to vacate his 1997 state
court convictions and remand to the trial court for a new trial.
We conclude that Chavis 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 a
drastic remedy and should be used only 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).
Mandamus relief is available only where there is no other
available remedy. In re Braxton, 258 F.3d 250, 261 (4th Cir.
2001). Here, Chavis had other means of obtaining relief; namely,
through a collateral attack on his conviction. Therefore, the
relief sought by Chavis 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 contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
- 2 -