Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-01282/USCOURTS-ca4-15-01282-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Shaheen Cabbagestalk
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1282

In re: SHAHEEN CABBAGESTALK,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (5:14-cv-03771-RMG-KDW)

Submitted: September 9, 2015 Decided: September 11, 2015

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Shaheen Cabbagestalk, Petitioner Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1282 Doc: 23 Filed: 09/11/2015 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Shaheen Cabbagestalk petitions for a writ of mandamus 

seeking an order directing his immediate release from prison. 

We conclude that Cabbagestalk 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 Cabbagestalk 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: 15-1282 Doc: 23 Filed: 09/11/2015 Pg: 2 of 2