In re: Jermal Daniel

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999328574-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999320586-2] Originating case number: 3:05-cr-00103-RJC-DCK-2 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999380744]. Mailed to: Jermal Daniels. [14-1253]

Appeal: 14-1253

Doc: 6

Filed: 06/23/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1253

In re: JERMAL DANIELS,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(3:05-cr-00103-RJC-DCK-2)

Submitted:

June 19, 2014

Decided: June 23, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jermal Daniels, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-1253

Doc: 6

Filed: 06/23/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Jermal

Daniels

petitions

for

a

writ

of

mandamus

seeking an order directing the district court to resentence him
for a second time.

We conclude that Daniels is not entitled to

mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used
only
Dist.

in

extraordinary

Court,

Moussaoui,
mandamus

426

333

relief

circumstances.

U.S.

F.3d
is

394,

509,

402

516-17

available

Kerr

(1976);
(4th

only

clear right to the relief sought.

Cir.

when

the

v.

United

United

States

States

2003).

v.

Further,

petitioner

has

a

In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan

Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988).
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

mandamus.
mandamus
dispense

sought

by

Daniels

Accordingly,
and

grant

with

contentions

are

oral

we

leave

deny

to

argument

adequately

is

not
the

proceed

petition
in

because

presented

available

in

forma
the
the

by

for

way

of

writ

of

pauperis.

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

2