Case Name: In re Nicholas James QUEEN, Sr., Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-10-31
Citations: 486 F. App'x 384
Docket Number: No. 12-1924
Parties: In re Nicholas James QUEEN, Sr., Petitioner.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 486
Pages: 384–384

Head Matter:
In re Nicholas James QUEEN, Sr., Petitioner.
No. 12-1924.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 16, 2012.
Decided: Oct. 31, 2012.
Nicholas James Queen, Sr., Petitioner Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Nicholas Queen, Sr., petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order directing the district court to examine its exercise of jurisdiction in a criminal case against him. We deny the petition.
Mandamus is a drastic remedy to 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).
Queen has failed to demonstrate entitlement to mandamus relief. 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.