Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-24-01673/USCOURTS-ca4-24-01673-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Abram D. Braveboy
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1673

In re: ABRAM D. BRAVEBOY,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina at Greenville. (8:23-cv-06104-TMC)

Submitted: December 19, 2024 Decided: December 23, 2024

Before KING and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Abram D. Braveboy, Petitioner Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1673 Doc: 21 Filed: 12/23/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Adam D. Braveboy, a South Carolina inmate, petitions for a writ of mandamus 

seeking an order granting relief from his criminal judgment. We conclude that Braveboy

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 (alteration and internal 

quotation marks omitted). 

The relief sought by Braveboy is not available by way of mandamus. To the extent 

Braveboy seeks to appeal the district court’s January 2024 order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2254 petition as successive and unauthorized, mandamus may not be used as a substitute 

for appeal. In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). Accordingly, 

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 this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1673 Doc: 21 Filed: 12/23/2024 Pg: 2 of 2