Case Name: In re: John Roosevelt BACCUS, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-05-26
Citations: 380 F. App'x 301
Docket Number: No. 10-1097
Parties: In re: John Roosevelt BACCUS, Petitioner.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 380
Pages: 301–302

Head Matter:
In re: John Roosevelt BACCUS, Petitioner.
No. 10-1097.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 20, 2010.
Decided: May 26, 2010.
John Roosevelt Baccus, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Roosevelt Baccus petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the South Carolina Unified Judicial System and South Carolina Department of Corrections managers to cease interfering with his receipt of legal mail. He also challenges his state conviction. We conclude that Baccus is not entitled to mandamus relief.
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). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. 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).
The relief sought by Baccus is not available by way of mandamus because there are other remedies available. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in for-ma pauperis, we deny Baccus's motion for appointment of counsel and 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.