Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-02066/USCOURTS-ca4-14-02066-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Charles Alonzo Tunstall
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-2066

IN RE: CHARLES ALONZO TUNSTALL-BEY,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

 (5:13-hc-02090-BO)

Submitted: April 16, 2015 Decided: April 20, 2015

Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Alonzo Tunstall-Bey, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-2066 Doc: 18 Filed: 04/20/2015 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles Alonzo Tunstall-Bey petitions for a writ of 

mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to direct 

prison officials to release the log of incoming and outgoing 

legal mail and directing the district court to provide photocopy 

services. We conclude that Tunstall-Bey is not entitled to 

mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only 

in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 

U.S. 394, 402 (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. 

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 

1988). 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 sought by Tunstall-Bey is not available by way 

of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, 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

Appeal: 14-2066 Doc: 18 Filed: 04/20/2015 Pg: 2 of 2