In Re: Bland ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-2031
    In Re:   TERESA L. BLAND,
    Petitioner.
    On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
    (0:06-cr-01255-JFA-2)
    Submitted:   February 18, 2010              Decided:   March 23, 2010
    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Teresa L. Bland, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Teresa     L.     Bland    petitions        for     a   writ     of   mandamus
    seeking an order directing the district court and/or the Bureau
    of   Prisons    to    allow    her    to    serve      her    sentence      through      home
    confinement.     We conclude that Bland is not entitled to mandamus
    relief.
    Mandamus is a drastic remedy and should be used only
    in   extraordinary      circumstances.               United    States      v.   Moussaoui,
    
    333 F.3d 509
    , 516 (4th Cir. 2003).                   Mandamus relief is available
    only when the petitioner has a clear, indisputable right to the
    relief sought.        
    Id. at 517.
             Moreover, mandamus may not be used
    as a substitute for appeal.                In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 
    503 F.3d 351
    ,     353    (4th     Cir.       2007).            Because    Bland      has    no
    indispensible        right     to     serve      her      sentence         through       home
    confinement, the relief she seeks is not available by way of
    mandamus.      Further, it is abundantly clear that she seeks to use
    mandamus as a vehicle to circumvent the appeal process.
    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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 092031

Judges: Wilkinson, Motz, Gregory

Filed Date: 3/23/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024