Case ID: f-appx_583/html/0219-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In re Leonard DILLON, Petitioner.
    No. 14-1531.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 23, 2014.
    Decided: Sept. 25, 2014.
    Leonard Dillon, Petitioner Pro Se.
    Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Leonard Dillon petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order transferring his criminal prosecution from federal court to state court, or dismissing the charges against him. He has also filed a motion for appropriate relief seeking the transfer of his criminal case from federal to state court. We conclude that Dillon is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); United States v. Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir.2003). Further, mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and there are no other adequate means by which the movant can obtain the requested relief. In re Braxton, 258 F.3d 250, 261 (4th Cir.2001); In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir.1988).

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and deny the motion for appropriate relief. 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.