In re: Linwood Duffie

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2116 Doc: 7 Filed: 12/18/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-2116
In re: LINWOOD EARL DUFFIE,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. (5:23-hc-02047-D)
Submitted: December 14, 2023 Decided: December 18, 2023
Before GREGORY and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Linwood Earl Duffie, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-2116 Doc: 7 Filed: 12/18/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Linwood Earl Duffie petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing
the district court to declare North Carolina’s habitual felon statute unconstitutional. We
conclude that Duffie 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). 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). Further, mandamus
may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351,
353 (4th Cir. 2007). The relief that Duffie seeks is not available by way of mandamus, and
he otherwise fails to establish a clear right to the relief he seeks.
We therefore deny the mandamus petition. 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