In Re: Michael Carothers v. , 536 F. App'x 315 ( 2013 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-1519
In re: MICHAEL BERNARD CAROTHERS, a/k/a Unc, a/k/a Uncle,
a/k/a Big Unc,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(No. 0:08-cr-00401-CMC-4)
Submitted: July 25, 2013 Decided: July 29, 2013
Before GREGORY, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Bernard Carothers, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Bernard Carothers petitions for a writ of
mandamus seeking an order requiring the district court to
provide transcripts. We conclude that Carothers 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 (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).
In addition, 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 Carothers 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