In Re: Linder v.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
DAVID WILLIAM LINDER,
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (2:04-cr-00191-JBF)
Submitted: October 31, 2006
November 8, 2006
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David William Linder, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM: David William Linder petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to provide Linder with trial exhibits. conviction. Linder further requests that we overturn his
We deny the petition.
Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and no other means to seek the requested relief. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 860 F.2d Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy Kerr v.
135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988).
and should only be used in extraordinary circumstances.
United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard, 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Linder has not established he
is entitled to the relief sought, as he fails to establish the requisite extraordinary circumstances. be used as a substitute for appeal. F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). Further, mandamus may not
In re United Steelworkers, 595 This court recently affirmed
Linder's conviction and sentence, see United States v. Linder, No. 05-4557, 2006 WL 2659067 (4th Cir. Sept. 15, 2006) (unpublished), and he may raise any additional challenges in a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). We will not consider the propriety of
Linder's conviction in this proceeding. 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
- 2 -
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
- 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?