In Re: Maurice Parker v. , 672 F. App'x 296 ( 2017 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1776
In re: MAURICE PARKER,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (5:16-hc-02078-BO)
Submitted: December 12, 2016 Decided: January 5, 2017
Before SHEDD and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Maurice Parker, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Maurice Parker petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an
order directing the district court judge to order the North
Carolina Attorney General to investigate Parker’s claim of
actual innocence. We conclude that Parker is not entitled to
mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only
in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426
U.S. 394, 402 (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 “has traditionally been used in the federal
courts only to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of
its prescribed jurisdiction or to compel it to exercise its
authority when it is its duty to do so.” Moussaoui, 333 F.3d at
516 (internal quotation marks omitted).
The relief sought by Parker 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
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
2