In Re: Franklin Smith

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999854639-2], denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999805178-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999821117-2], granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999813441-2], granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999808746-2] Originating case number: Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999919781]. Mailed to: F. Smith. [16-1470]

Appeal: 16-1470

Doc: 13

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1470

In Re:

FRANKLIN CHARLES SMITH,
Petitioner.

On Petitions for Writs of Mandamus.

Submitted:

August 10, 2016

Decided:

August 30, 2016

Before MOTZ and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.

Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Franklin Charles Smith, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1470

Doc: 13

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Franklin Charles Smith has filed a petition for a writ of
mandamus and

a

supplemental

petition

for

a

writ

of

mandamus

seeking an order compelling the lifting of an extradition order
and his release from custody.

We conclude that Smith is not

entitled to mandamus relief.
Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only
in extraordinary circumstances.

Kerr v. U.S. 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).

The relief sought by Smith is not available by way of

mandamus.
Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis,

we

dispense

with

contentions

deny

are

the

oral

petitions

argument

adequately

for

writs

because

presented

in

the
the

of

mandamus.

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITIONS DENIED

2