DocketNumber: 03-6421
Citation Numbers: 69 F. App'x 645
Judges: Traxler, King, Gregory
Filed Date: 7/24/2003
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6421 PRINCE S. J. WEBBER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, Senior District Judge. (CA-02-3093-FNS) Submitted: July 1, 2003 Decided: July 24, 2003 Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Prince S. J. Webber, Appellant Pro Se. Allen F. Loucks, Neil Ray White, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Prince S. J. Webber appeals from the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ a mandamus, which sought an effective parole date or an order to full term expiration from the United States Parole Commission. Mandamus relief is only available 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 situations. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court,426 U.S. 394
, 402 (1976). Because Webber fails to establish a clear right to the relief he seeks, he is not entitled to mandamus relief. Thus, we affirm the district court’s order for the reasons stated by the district court. Webber v. Dep’t of Justice, No. CA-02-3093-FNS (D. Md. Feb. 20, 2003). We also deny Webber’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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. AFFIRMED 2