In Re: Missouri v.

Filing 920060728


Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7090 In Re: VINCENT MISSOURI, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (6:00-cr-00498-MBS; 6:05-cv-01598-MBS) Submitted: July 20, 2006 Decided: July 28, 2006 Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vincent Missouri, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Vincent Missouri petitions for a writ of mandamus. He seeks an order directing the district court to act on his motion for reconsideration, and asks this court vacate the dismissal of his motion for collateral review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000). He also requests leave to file an oversize mandamus petition. We grant Missouri's motion to file an oversize petition, but conclude that Missouri 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 Further, mandamus is a used in extraordinary Ass'n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). drastic remedy and should only be circumstances. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). With respect to Missouri's request that the district court act on his motion for reconsideration, our review of the docket sheet reveals that the district court denied the motion in May 2006. Because the district court recently acted, this portion With respect to the of Missouri's mandamus petition is moot. request that we direct the district court to vacate its order dismissing his 2255 motion, we note that mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). In re United Steelworkers, 595 F.2d Because the relief sought by Missouri is We not available by way of mandamus, we deny the petition. - 2 - 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 - 3 -

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?