In Re: Gatewood

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-1199
In Re: MITCHELL GATEWOOD,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (3:08-cv-00182-RJC)
Submitted: March 30, 2010 Decided: April 6, 2010
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mitchell Gatewood, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mitchell Gatewood petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order directing the district court to hold an
evidentiary hearing. We conclude that Gatewood 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 only be used 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 Gatewood 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