Case Name: In re: COREY E. JOHNSON, Petitioner
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-10-04
Citations: 448 F. App'x 397
Docket Number: No. 11-1615
Parties: In re: COREY E. JOHNSON, Petitioner.
Judges: Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 448
Pages: 397–397

Head Matter:
In re: COREY E. JOHNSON, Petitioner.
No. 11-1615.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 29, 2011.
Decided: Oct. 4, 2011.
Corey E. Johnson, Petitioner Pro Se.
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Corey E. Johnson petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order compelling the district court to vacate its order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. We conclude that Johnson 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 Johnson is not available by way of mandamus. 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.