Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-09-02112/USCOURTS-ca4-09-02112-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Larry Sinclair Williams
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-2112

In Re: LARRY SINCLAIR WILLIAMS,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(1:08-cv-00722-CMH; 1:92-CR-00083-1)

Submitted: June 1, 2010 Decided: June 4, 2010

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Sinclair Williams, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 09-2112 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/04/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Larry Sinclair Williams petitions for a writ of 

mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to grant 

relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2009) motion. We conclude that 

Williams 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 (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 Williams is not available by way of 

mandamus. 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

PETITION DENIED

Appeal: 09-2112 Doc: 7 Filed: 06/04/2010 Pg: 2 of 2