In Re: Williams ( 2010 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1746
In Re: GARY BUTERRA WILLIAMS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(4:08-cr-00087-RGD-FBS-1)
Submitted: July 27, 2010 Decided: August 4, 2010
Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gary Buterra Williams, Petitioner Pro Se. Eric Matthew Hurt,
Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gary Buterra Williams petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order dismissing the indictment against him for
violations of his rights to a speedy trial. We conclude that
Williams is not entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States
Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v.
Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further,
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).
Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal.
In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007).
Williams filed a motion to dismiss the indictment in the
district court based on violations of his rights to a speedy
trial that the district court denied, and Williams has not
appealed that order.
Therefore, the relief sought by Williams 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 also deny Williams’ emergency motion to
stay the district court proceedings. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
3