Case Name: In re Charles A. DAVIS, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-08-24
Citations: 613 F. App'x 226
Docket Number: No. 15-1629
Parties: In re Charles A. DAVIS, Petitioner.
Judges: Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 613
Pages: 226–227

Head Matter:
In re Charles A. DAVIS, Petitioner.
No. 15-1629.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 20, 2015.
Decided: Aug. 24, 2015.
Charles A. Davis, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charles A. Davis petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order setting aside his conviction and sentence or directing the district court to set aside his conviction and sentence. We conclude that Davis 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, 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 Davis is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We also deny as moot Davis' request for judicial notice. 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.