In Re: Howard Scott


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999822520-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999809466-2] Originating case number: 2:09-cr-00991-PMD-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999864571]. Mailed to: Howard Scott. [16-1489]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-1489 Doc: 9 Filed: 06/23/2016 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1489 In re: HOWARD SCOTT, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (2:09-cr-00991-PMD-1) Submitted: June 21, 2016 Decided: June 23, 2016 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Howard Scott, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-1489 Doc: 9 Filed: 06/23/2016 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Howard Scott petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking an order directing hearing to Guidelines the address applies district whether to court to Amendment him. We hold 709 conclude to an evidentiary the that Sentencing Scott 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. 135, 138 (4th In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d Cir. 1988). substitute for appeal. Mandamus may not be used as a In re Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). The relief sought by Scott is not available by way of mandamus because Scott fails to show any clear right to relief in the form of an evidentiary hearing regarding the applicability of Amendment 709. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for a writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 2

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?