Categories: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions

IN RE WAY, 326 Fed.Appx. 173 (4th Cir. 2009)

In re: Alan Beaver Laverte WAY, Petitioner.

No. 09-1034.United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.Submitted: May 28, 2009.
Decided: June 5, 2009.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Appeal from the On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (8:02-cr-00210-DKC-1).

Alan Beaver Laverte Way, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alan Beaver Laverte Way petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order to compel the district court to dismiss his indictment. We conclude that Way 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 Way is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma 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.

jdjungle