Case Name: In re: Matthew VIRTUE, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-10-15
Citations: 112 F. App'x 263
Docket Number: No. 04-7166
Parties: In re: Matthew VIRTUE, Petitioner.
Judges: Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 112
Pages: 263–264

Head Matter:
In re: Matthew VIRTUE, Petitioner.
No. 04-7166.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 7, 2004.
Decided Oct. 15, 2004.
Matthew Virtue, Petitioner pro se.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Matthew Virtue petitions for writ of mandamus. He seeks an order granting his immediate release from the Federal Correctional Center and placement in a Community Corrections Center.
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 Virtue is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant Virtue's motion to submit additional authority, 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