Case Name: In re: Calvin Douglas DYESS; Michael Jason Bartram, Petitioners
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-03-18
Citations: 90 F. App'x 34
Docket Number: No. 03-7518
Parties: In re: Calvin Douglas DYESS; Michael Jason Bartram, Petitioners.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 90
Pages: 34–34

Head Matter:
In re: Calvin Douglas DYESS; Michael Jason Bartram, Petitioners.
No. 03-7518.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 17, 2003.
Decided March 18, 2004.
Calvin Douglas Dyess and Michael Jason Bartram, Petitioners pro se.
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, 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Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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.
Calvin Douglas Dyess petitions for a writ of mandamus. He seeks an order directing the district court to allow him to withdraw his guilty plea.
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 be used only 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 Dyess 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