In Re: Wilson v. , 194 F. App'x 161 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-6540
    In Re:   ROBERT M. WILSON,
    Petitioner.
    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
    (1:04-cv-02776-JFM)
    Submitted:   July 31, 2006                 Decided:   August 14, 2006
    Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Robert M. Wilson, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Robert M. Wilson petitions for writ of mandamus seeking
    an order reopening his federal habeas petition under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2241
     (2000).         The district court dismissed Wilson’s habeas
    petition, originally asserted under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000), as
    time-barred.     In the instant mandamus petition, Wilson asks this
    court to direct the district court to reopen his petition under
    § 2241.      We conclude that Wilson 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 may not be used as a substitute for appeal.                In re United
    Steelworkers, 
    595 F.2d 958
    , 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
    The relief sought by Wilson is not available by way of
    mandamus.    Accordingly, 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 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-6540

Citation Numbers: 194 F. App'x 161

Judges: Gregory, King, Per Curiam, Shedd

Filed Date: 8/14/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024