In Re: Whitaker v.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-4493
In Re: MARTELL WHITAKER,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-98-1016)
Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: October 30, 2002
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Martell Whitaker, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Martell Whitaker petitions for a writ of mandamus. Whitaker
asks this court to order the Government to respond to his petition
and to direct the district court to hold a suppression hearing and
to rule on his motion to suppress, filed prior to his 1999 trial
and conviction.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a
clear right to the relief sought. See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan
Assn., 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus is a
drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances. See 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. See In re United
Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979).
The relief sought by Whitaker is not available by way of
mandamus. Accordingly, 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