Case ID: f-appx_144/html/0350-01.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: Darryl Eugene LEWIS, Petitioner.
    No. 05-7211.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 27, 2005.
    Decided: Oct. 4, 2005.
    Darryl Eugene Lewis, Petitioner pro se.
    Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Darryl Eugene Lewis petitions for writ of mandamus. He seeks an order directing the district court to follow certain statutes and sentencing guidelines and to order his immediate release from confinement.

Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. See 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. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979).

The relief sought by Lewis is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant Lewis’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We deny Lewis’s motion to expedite the appeal. 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