In re: Roberto Darden

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion(s) disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999831645-2]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus (FRAP 21) [999831640-2]. Originating case number: 4:11-cr-00052-AWA-LRL-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999930740]. Mailed to: Roberto Darden. [16-1583]

Appeal: 16-1583

Doc: 8

Filed: 09/16/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1583

In re:

ROBERTO ANTOINE DARDEN, a/k/a “Dizz-e”, a/k/a “Javon”,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
(4:11-cr-00052-AWA-LRL-1)

Submitted:

September 13, 2016

Decided:

September 16, 2016

Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roberto Antoine Darden, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-1583

Doc: 8

Filed: 09/16/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Roberto Antoine Darden petitions for a writ of mandamus
seeking an order compelling the district court to grant his motion
for recusal.

We conclude that Darden 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 Norfolk S. Ry. Co., 756 F.3d 282, 294 (4th Cir. 2014).
Darden

has

not

shown

the

existence

of

an

extraordinary

circumstance, nor has he shown that he has a clear right to the
relief he seeks.

Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma

pauperis and the petition for writ of mandamus.

We dispense with

oral

contentions

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

this

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED

2