In Re: Ingram v.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-6920
IN RE: WALTER LOUIS INGRAM,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(CA-04-1550-JFM)
Submitted: September 16, 2004 Decided: September 23, 2004
Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Walter Louis Ingram, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Walter Louis Ingram petitions for writ of mandamus. He
seeks an order directing the district court to issue writ of habeas
corpus.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has
a clear right to the relief sought. 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. 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 Ingram is not available by way of
mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant Ingram’s motion for 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 -