In Re: Spencer v. ( 2000 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-6879
In Re: DONALD L. SPENCER,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-97-509-3)
Submitted: October 17, 2000 Decided: October 26, 2000
Before LUTTIG and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donald L. Spencer, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
In June 1997, Donald L. Spencer filed a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254(West 1994 & Supp. 2000) petition. The district court dismissed
the petition as untimely, and this Court affirmed. Asserting that
these decisions were erroneous, Spencer now petitions this Court to
issue a writ of mandamus compelling the district court to consider
his § 2254 petition. In light of this Court’s mandate, however,
the respondent court was under no “clear duty” to review Spencer’s
§ 2254 claims. Estate of Michael v. Lullo, 173 F.3d 503, 512-13
(4th Cir. 1999). Furthermore, Spencer has not established a lack
of alternative remedies; specifically, he may be able to obtain
relief by filing a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition in the district
in which he is confined. See In re Jones, F.3d , 2000 WL
994319, at *4 (4th Cir. July 18, 2000). Accordingly, Spencer fails
to demonstrate that he is entitled to mandamus relief. See
Michael, 173 F.3d at 512-13. We therefore 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
2