In re: Denver Blevins

USCA4 Appeal: 22-2135 Doc: 11 Filed: 12/15/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-2135
In re: DENVER W. BLEVINS,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:21-cv-00146-MR)
Submitted: December 12, 2022 Decided: December 15, 2022
Before AGEE and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Denver W. Blevins, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2135 Doc: 11 Filed: 12/15/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Denver W. Blevins petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing
vacatur of his state convictions and sentences. We conclude that Blevins is not entitled to
mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary
circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown,
LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when
the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other adequate means to
attain the relief [he] desires.” Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (cleaned up). This court
does not have jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief against state officials, Gurley v.
Superior Ct. of Mecklenburg Cnty., 411 F.2d 586, 587 (4th Cir. 1969), and does not have
jurisdiction to review final state court orders, D.C. Ct. of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S.
462, 482 (1983).
The relief Blevins seeks is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we
deny Blevins’ request for hearing en banc and 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
PETITION DENIED
2