Case Name: In re Jermal DANIELS, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-06-23
Citations: 576 F. App'x 199
Docket Number: No. 14-1253
Parties: In re Jermal DANIELS, Petitioner.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 576
Pages: 199–200

Head Matter:
In re Jermal DANIELS, Petitioner.
No. 14-1253.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 19, 2014.
Decided: June 23, 2014.
Jermal Daniels, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jermal Daniels petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to resentence him for a second time. We conclude that Daniels 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).
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 Daniels is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus and grant leave to proceed in forma pau-peris. 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.