In re: Willie Horton

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999611165-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999600428-2]. Originating case number: 1:89-cr-00180-AJT-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999680237]. Mailed to: Willie Horton. [15-1633]

Appeal: 15-1633

Doc: 12

Filed: 10/19/2015

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1633

In re:

WILLIE HORTON,
Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(1:89-cr-00180-AJT-1)

Submitted:

October 15, 2015

Decided:

October 19, 2015

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Willie Horton, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1633

Doc: 12

Filed: 10/19/2015

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Willie Horton petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an
order

directing

the

district

court

to

underlying post-conviction proceedings.
is

not

entitled

to

mandamus

remedy

and

should

drastic

circumstances.

grant

on

his

We conclude that Horton

relief.
be

relief

Mandamus

used

only

in

relief

is

a

extraordinary

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).

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 Horton is not available by way of mandamus.
Accordingly,

although

pauperis,

we

dispense

with

contentions

deny

are

oral

we

the

grant

petition

argument

adequately

leave
for

writ

because

presented

to

in

proceed
of

the
the

in

forma

mandamus.

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

2