In re: Lyle v.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-1631
In Re: MICHAEL TYRONE LYLE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(1:02-cr-00395)
Submitted: August 20, 2009 Decided: August 26, 2009
Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON,
Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Tyrone Lyle, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Lyle petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking
an order directing the district court to correct its
jurisdictional error. We conclude Lyle 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 Lyle is not available by way of
mandamus. Accordingly, while we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, we deny the petition for a 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