Source: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Date: 2006-06-28
Jurisdiction: United States
Docket: No. 06-1356
Citation: 185 F. App'x 230
Opinion
PER CURIAM: David M. Kissi petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order postponing his criminal trial, directing a change of venue, and recusing the district court judge. We conclude that Kissi 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). Finally, mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir.1979). The relief sought by Kissi is not available by way of mandamus. Accordingly, although we grant Kissi’s motion 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.