Case Name: In re: Martell WHITAKER, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-10-30
Citations: 49 F. App'x 449
Docket Number: No. 02-4493
Parties: In re: Martell WHITAKER, Petitioner.
Judges: Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 49
Pages: 449–450

Head Matter:
In re: Martell WHITAKER, Petitioner.
No. 02-4493.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 24, 2002.
Decided Oct. 30, 2002.
Martell Whitaker, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Martell Whitaker petitions for a writ of mandamus. Whitaker asks this court to order the Government to respond to his petition and to direct the district court to hold a suppression hearing and to rule on his motion to suppress, filed prior to his 1999 trial and conviction.
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 only be used 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 Whitaker is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, we deny the petition for a 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.