Case Name: In re: Thomas J. SAVOCA, a/k/a Irvin L. Roddy, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-01-03
Citations: 406 F. App'x 753
Docket Number: No. 10-2217
Parties: In re: Thomas J. SAVOCA, a/k/a Irvin L. Roddy, Petitioner.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 406
Pages: 753–754

Head Matter:
In re: Thomas J. SAVOCA, a/k/a Irvin L. Roddy, Petitioner.
No. 10-2217.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 21, 2010.
Decided: Jan. 3, 2011.
Thomas J. Savoca, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Thomas J. Savoca petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order from this court directing the district court to produce copies of two videos used during the criminal proceedings against Savoca. We conclude that Savoca 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, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (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).
The relief sought by Savoca is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED.